2012 IRI Predictions [Archive]

CalTran

15-05-2012, 23:36

You can see the invites here (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=106486), look over them, and decided your prediction for the FIRST All Star Game.

I cast my votes:
Now to see who takes up on Bomb Squand and ATA's strategies, and see who dives for a wide feeder bot first. Is it too risky to take a feeder as a first pick, and a shooter as a second? At any other competition it would be, but with such a deep field, you might be able to take the gamble and pay off big. Any predictions on super alliances yet? I'm feeling 1114+469+2826+someone as the champs. After a strong performance on Archimedes, 1114 was plagued by bad luck on Einstein and walked away with a single gold (But kept an eye on the big prize) and are itching for redemption. As their first pick, their old friends 469 will be more than willing to bring their super sonic shooter to the courts. 2826, after falling to 1114 in three intense matches on Archimedes, will prove to be the decisive third pick. They're good, but with such a deep field, may fall short on the seeding.

Though, I'm really a 2056 fan, and would absolutely love to see them win IRI for a second year in a row. I think that with seeding 2nd on Archimedes, and with the crazy upset they pulled over 1114 at GTRWest F1, they could put together an alliance to upset what I previously predicted. Gotta stay faithful to the team I love.

But to keep the other thread less cluttered, here's an open thread for your thoughts.
By all means, contradict me and prove me wrong. Nothing would make my summer better than that :)

Chris is me

16-05-2012, 00:08

Just to address a point you make in one of your posts, the second pick as a wide robot that primarily feeds balls from one end of the field to another isn't a new strategy that debuted at the Championship. It's been present ever since some innovative teams dreamed it up Week 1 :)

At this event, picking a feeder first round would be stupid. There's too much firepower on the board to do that, and as 16 demonstrated at Champs, an offensive robot can become a feeder robot very quickly. I think there will be more wide bots picked in the 4th round as triple-balance substitutions as a form of insurance though.

1114+469+2826

If 2826 falls to even the 9th pick at IRI, either they weren't playing at their Championship level or something went seriously wrong with regards to scouting. They are definitively on the same tier as 1114, 67, and 469, and I bet if you counted it out ball for ball they would have been the best ball scorer in the Archimedes elims.

As for predicting IRI... Well, that's probably impossible. It's too dependent on scheduling. Just get some popcorn and watch the madness unfold is what I say.

tim-tim

16-05-2012, 00:13

If I recall, all three of your picks (1114, 469, and 2826) are long bots. Granted there will be a 4th robot, the triple would be all but ruled out unless the 4th was a wide bot.

Food for thought...

CalTran

16-05-2012, 00:20

If I recall, all three of your picks (1114, 469, and 2826) are long bots.

1114 is a long but can hang off significantly, 469 is practically a 27" square, and 2826 is long. I think they can hang though. They at least tried hanging at Champs.

TheMadCADer

16-05-2012, 00:29

Anyone find the gap from 1114 to 1538 a little strange? What happened to all the teams in that area? The only teams from that range I can immediately think of are 1477, 1323 and 1429. I don't know if 1429 or 1323 applied (I know 1477 didn't), but it's weird that teams from that period haven't had as much perceived success.

There isn't a gap that large anywhere else, pretty much everything is fairly even.

AdamHeard

16-05-2012, 00:38

Basel A

16-05-2012, 01:22

I believe that that, besides the usual suspects, one team that should perform at a very high level in the eliminations is 2481. Other teams that could surprise people are 829 and 1023. Of the "obvious teams," my top picks have to be 341, 67, 2056, and 1114.

nikeairmancurry

16-05-2012, 02:56

Chris Fultz

16-05-2012, 07:49

sdcantrell56

16-05-2012, 07:53

Just to address a point you make in one of your posts, the second pick as a wide robot that primarily feeds balls from one end of the field to another isn't a new strategy that debuted at the Championship. It's been present ever since some innovative teams dreamed it up Week 1 :)

At this event, picking a feeder first round would be stupid. There's too much firepower on the board to do that, and as 16 demonstrated at Champs, an offensive robot can become a feeder robot very quickly. I think there will be more wide bots picked in the 4th round as triple-balance substitutions as a form of insurance though.

If 2826 falls to even the 9th pick at IRI, either they weren't playing at their Championship level or something went seriously wrong with regards to scouting. They are definitively on the same tier as 1114, 67, and 469, and I bet if you counted it out ball for ball they would have been the best ball scorer in the Archimedes elims.

As for predicting IRI... Well, that's probably impossible. It's too dependent on scheduling. Just get some popcorn and watch the madness unfold is what I say.

Playing on Archimedes, I would have to say come eliminations 2826 appeared to be the absolute top offensive robot. It was amazing the efficiency that they were scoring with. They do have trouble hanging off the ramp though but I'm sure can get that worked out for IRI.

Jared Russell

16-05-2012, 08:00

With the 5 extra pounds of weight that IRI allows, just about any robot that wants to can come up with a way to triple balance. Balancing two or more long robots will still be a challenge, but stingers/brakes are pretty easy additions for just about any type of robot.

lemiant

16-05-2012, 09:14

If 2826 falls to even the 9th pick at IRI, either they weren't playing at their Championship level or something went seriously wrong with regards to scouting. They are definitively on the same tier as 1114, 67, and 469, and I bet if you counted it out ball for ball they would have been the best ball scorer in the Archimedes elims.

FYI our scouting actually had the two top scoring teams as 2826 and 2056 in that order.

1114 is a long but can hang off significantly, 469 is practically a 27" square, and 2826 is long. I think they can hang though. They at least tried hanging at Champs.
Not to bring out old wounds, but I suggest you watch archi F3, 2826 lost the division because they can't triple reliably. Although I have a lot of faith they will have a stinger and that all figured out come IRI.

Al Skierkiewicz

16-05-2012, 09:15

Jared Russell

16-05-2012, 10:53

EricLeifermann

16-05-2012, 13:28

FYI our scouting actually had the two top scoring teams as 2826 and 2056 in that order.

Not to bring out old wounds, but I suggest you watch archi F3, 2826 lost the division because they can't triple reliably. Although I have a lot of faith they will have a stinger and that all figured out come IRI.

We had a stinger at champs. We also trippled many times and quickly on the practice field during lunch before elims started. We have no idea why we couldnt triple on the actual field.

Starke

16-05-2012, 13:49

#1: 2056 - 469 - 25 - 340
#2: 341 - 118 - 1023 - 111
#3: 2826 - 67 - 330 - 3322
#4: 1114 - 33 - 3098 - 971
#5: 548 - 359 - 744 - 829
#6: 148 - 254 - 2054 - 1676
#7: 973 - 624 - 16 - 2168
#8: 2481 - 868 - 68 - 399

All predictions are guaranteed to be wrong, or your money back.

WOW! That is one monster of a list! I am even more excited about IRI now!

Gary Dillard

16-05-2012, 14:11

Depending on the students and the school, 2012 seniors may not be a part of the team.

Can you clarify Chris; I assume UOS all 2012 rules apply. 2.2.3 says the the drivers and human player must be pre-college student team members. You don't allow alumni to be members of the team, even as mentors? It seems that it would be still be legal for them to drive if they haven't started college, but it is the individual team's choice as to whether they drive or not, correct?

Al Skierkiewicz

16-05-2012, 14:15

Gary,
In some school districts, graduates are no longer included in the school roster, they cannot participate in school activities and are not covered under insurance, travel or hotel stays. That is the case with our graduates. They can travel on their own, make their own hotel plans and attend post season events strictly on their own. Team policy does not allow them to drive once they graduate. They become adult mentors upon graduation only if they meet some criteria. One of those is "currently attending a college or university with acceptable grades".

Travis Hoffman

16-05-2012, 14:59

Keep in mind that many teams may be using a new drive team. Depending on the students and the school, 2012 seniors may not be a part of the team.

Our seniors are now alumni, so we will have a new driver and operator. Many others may be in that same situation.

48's senior drive team will be there and driving. They've earned it, and at IRI, I feel we want to bring the very best to compete against the very best.

We can afford to do this because we attend Ra-Cha-Cha Ruckus in the fall. The new drive team will get their feet wet there. :)

LeelandS

16-05-2012, 15:31

Can you clarify Chris; I assume UOS all 2012 rules apply. 2.2.3 says the the drivers and human player must be pre-college student team members. You don't allow alumni to be members of the team, even as mentors? It seems that it would be still be legal for them to drive if they haven't started college, but it is the individual team's choice as to whether they drive or not, correct?

It may be different on other teams, but on 1126, off season events like IRI are not school sanctioned events. We pay for admission, we provide our own transportation (parent volunteers for the most part), things like that. When I went to IRI in 2011 as a member of 1126, I had graduated, but was allowed to take part of it.

Also, I can't remember where I read it, but I believe there was an IRI rule that said drive team members had to be pre-college students or students who had graduated in the 2011 school year.

Andy Baker

16-05-2012, 15:47

Also, I can't remember where I read it, but I believe there was an IRI rule that said drive team members had to be pre-college students or students who had graduated in the 2011 school year.

When IRI had mentor matches, there were driver rules which limited the youth of the driver. However, we have no added rules for the regular matches. Some teams treat this like their seniors' "last hurrah", while others make their seniors not be part of the team. This is up to the teams, not IRI.

Andy B.

J_Miles

16-05-2012, 15:55

Keep in mind that many teams may be using a new drive team. Depending on the students and the school, 2012 seniors may not be a part of the team.

Our seniors are now alumni, so we will have a new driver and operator. Many others may be in that same situation.

This is certainly how 2337 operates. After Championship in 2011, our seniors graduated, and I came in as the driver for the offseason. With that said, we also attended two competitions before IRI last year - The TARDEC Intelligent Ground Vehicle Competition and the Monroe Advanced Robotics Competition - so the situation is still slightly different than with teams who may or may not be putting drivers with no actual competition experience on the field for IRI.

lakstick

16-05-2012, 17:16

OZ_341

16-05-2012, 17:28

On 341 we treat this as our senior's "last chance to dance". :)

qzrrbz

16-05-2012, 17:35

Is it just me or does the number 2 alliance seem to be more powerful than the number 1?

Only one way to find out! :p

J_Miles

16-05-2012, 18:35

Is it just me or does the number 2 alliance seem to be more powerful than the number 1?

They seem to be VERY comparable. 2056-341 are two top-notch scorers, but 341 may have the edge. 469-118 goes to 469, 25-1023 could go either way, since both are stellar, and I think 340-111 actually goes to 340. Both are killer alliances, and any matches pitting one against the other would be sure to include some incredible fireworks. The disparity between #1 & #2 in my mind is the number of long bots. Where 25 and 1023 are fairly comparable, 25 is long with no stabilization device (at least at CMP) while 1023 is wide and possesses a "stinger" (with that said, their 4-wheel-drive makes it nearly impossible to hang very much of their robot off the end of the bridge. Watch any of quarterfinal 3 at the Michigan State Championship and you'll see the rather painful truth there) I think for pure shooting power, #1 is my favorite, while for balancing potential, I give #2 a slight edge

qzrrbz

16-05-2012, 18:51

They seem to be VERY comparable. 2056-341 are two top-notch scorers, but 341 may have the edge. 469-118 goes to 469, 25-1023 could go either way, since both are stellar, and I think 340-111 actually goes to 340. Both are killer alliances, and any matches pitting one against the other would be sure to include some incredible fireworks. The disparity between #1 & #2 in my mind is the number of long bots. Where 25 and 1023 are fairly comparable, 25 is long with no stabilization device (at least at CMP) while 1023 is wide and possesses a "stinger" (with that said, their 4-wheel-drive makes it nearly impossible to hang very much of their robot off the end of the bridge. Watch any of quarterfinal 3 at the Michigan State Championship and you'll see the rather painful truth there) I think for pure shooting power, #1 is my favorite, while for balancing potential, I give #2 a slight edge

1023 has their "Nessie" sticker from Detroit district -- 4 times if memory serves... :)

lakstick

16-05-2012, 20:07

Having competed with at least 10 of these teams during our 5 tournament stint this year, I personally can't wait to see these qualification matches, let alone eliminations!

I would predict 2056 and 1114 pairing up yet again, and forming an alliance that defeated our teams in both the semifinals and finals at the Waterloo Regional.

I could also see 67 and 469 pairing up once again, forming the two alliance partners that brought us the winners banner at Troy District this year.

This is going to be a great competition, hopefully I can get a ride down!

Debbie

16-05-2012, 20:28

1023 has their "Nessie" sticker from Detroit district -- 4 times if memory serves... :)
Pre-"Stinger" even... we added that after Detroit. We used it on the practice field in Livonia but didn't feel we needed the triple in the end. Definitely a couple of new options with an extra 5 pounds... we'll see what we can do! Really looking forward to finding out first hand what IRI is all about!

waialua359

16-05-2012, 20:55

Our team's biggest issue was not being able to add an appendage to collect balls, due to weight constraint. With 5lbs more, we definitely plan on adding one that we have already designed............and just got our robot back 1 hr. ago from CMP.
If I had 1st choice, I'd take 118 due to our experience together already and a triple balance threat. We already showed high scoring consistency and worked well together in not interfering with each other during shots taken.

Well actually, just making eliminations at IRI is already a huge accomplishment and hopefully we can be part of a great alliance to go for the 3-peat.

Chris Fultz

16-05-2012, 21:07

Can you clarify Chris; I assume UOS all 2012 rules apply. 2.2.3 says the the drivers and human player must be pre-college student team members. You don't allow alumni to be members of the team, even as mentors? It seems that it would be still be legal for them to drive if they haven't started college, but it is the individual team's choice as to whether they drive or not, correct?

This is a Cyber Blue / school rule. Once students graduate, they are no longer students on the team. They cannot travel as students anymore and we start the transition to new students and new student leaders.

For IRI, they have to be no older than 2012 graduated seniors.

Mr. Lim

16-05-2012, 21:17

I predict that little-known 907 will put up one of the quietest 1.5 hybrid + 7 teleop baskets per match + consistent balancing performances at the event. Statistically, they will have a top 15 performance in terms of points scored, but still may not be picked for the elims...:(

If they are picked, they'll make an alliance awfully happy :yikes:.

Peyton Yeung

16-05-2012, 22:01

On 341 we treat this as our senior's "last chance to dance". :)

I'm sad that with no talent show we won't see "daisy style"

Basel A

16-05-2012, 22:37

I have "simulated" IRI using each team's best regional/divisional OPR (tiebreaker: average OPR from Ed Law's post-Championship spreadsheet). I assumed "optimal" play - the teams seed according to OPR, and pick the highest OPR team available in every situation (keeping in mind the 1-8, 1-8, 8-1 IRI selection order). Here are the alliances that I ended up with (also making the assumption that all invited teams do attend):

#1: 2056 - 469 - 25 - 340
#2: 341 - 118 - 1023 - 111
#3: 2826 - 67 - 330 - 3322
#4: 1114 - 33 - 3098 - 971
#5: 548 - 359 - 744 - 829
#6: 148 - 254 - 2054 - 1676
#7: 973 - 624 - 16 - 2168
#8: 2481 - 868 - 68 - 399

All predictions are guaranteed to be wrong, or your money back.

If you don't mind me saying, while they're very similar, I found Most Recent OPR was a better predictor than Best OPR at the 2012 CMP. Of course, there's no guarantee that will also be the case at IRI. Either way, I'm continuing to do research and plan to go into past years as well. This may turn into a white paper, eventually.

As for the issue of new drive teams, my predictions were based statistically on the regular season+CMP, so they assume the same drive teams will be used. Just another failing of statistics. :)

AlexD744

17-05-2012, 00:29

I have "simulated" IRI using each team's best regional/divisional OPR (tiebreaker: average OPR from Ed Law's post-Championship spreadsheet). I assumed "optimal" play - the teams seed according to OPR, and pick the highest OPR team available in every situation (keeping in mind the 1-8, 1-8, 8-1 IRI selection order). Here are the alliances that I ended up with (also making the assumption that all invited teams do attend):

#1: 2056 - 469 - 25 - 340
#2: 341 - 118 - 1023 - 111
#3: 2826 - 67 - 330 - 3322
#4: 1114 - 33 - 3098 - 971
#5: 548 - 359 - 744 - 829
#6: 148 - 254 - 2054 - 1676
#7: 973 - 624 - 16 - 2168
#8: 2481 - 868 - 68 - 399

All predictions are guaranteed to be wrong, or your money back.

Anybody else notice that there's no pink on this list... I checked OPRNet and it said their OPR was ~27 in Curie, you more think that would be more than enough, but 340 has 28 in newton. Only 1 Florida team on this list :( but that's ok predictions can never be right.

Jared Russell

17-05-2012, 07:32

If you don't mind me saying, while they're very similar, I found Most Recent OPR was a better predictor than Best OPR at the 2012 CMP. Of course, there's no guarantee that will also be the case at IRI. Either way, I'm continuing to do research and plan to go into past years as well. This may turn into a white paper, eventually.

Here is the same list using Most Recent OPR as the sorting mechanism (tiebreaker: Average OPR from the Ed Law spreadsheet):

#1: 2056 - 341 - 2054 - 192
#2: 118 - 2826 - 68 - 379
#3: 33 - 148 - 25 - 2590
#4: 254 - 548 - 469 - 233
#5: 973 - 2481 - 1676 - 3138
#6: 868 - 1023 - 829 - 781
#7: 67 - 744 - 340 - 3193
#8: 624 - 1114 - 111 - 1718

Same caveat as before: All predictions wrong, or your money back!

Ekcrbe

17-05-2012, 09:12

#1: 2056 - 469 - 25 - 340
#2: 341 - 118 - 1023 - 111
#3: 2826 - 67 - 330 - 3322
#4: 1114 - 33 - 3098 - 971
#5: 548 - 359 - 744 - 829
#6: 148 - 254 - 2054 - 1676
#7: 973 - 624 - 16 - 2168
#8: 2481 - 868 - 68 - 399

I think the real show could see 16 going a little earlier, as we've all seen that OPR can be overrated--especially for them.

I would also expect 548 to even be a little higher than they are on that list--they're just so strong across the board.

#1: 2056 - 341 - 2054 - 192
#2: 118 - 2826 - 68 - 379
#3: 33 - 148 - 25 - 2590
#4: 254 - 548 - 469 - 233
#5: 973 - 2481 - 1676 - 3138
#6: 868 - 1023 - 829 - 781
#7: 67 - 744 - 340 - 3193
#8: 624 - 1114 - 111 - 1718

This is interesting. I would actually expect a few teams going up from the previous list, not down. Up and down, however, depends on how you value higher 1st pick vs. lower alliance captain. How do you rank those? Is 1st pick overall the 2nd highest, or 9th? And is 2nd alliance captain 2nd ranked or 3rd?

Jared Russell

17-05-2012, 10:48

This is interesting. I would actually expect a few teams going up from the previous list, not down. Up and down, however, depends on how you value higher 1st pick vs. lower alliance captain. How do you rank those? Is 1st pick overall the 2nd highest, or 9th? And is 2nd alliance captain 2nd ranked or 3rd?

I assumed all teams seed according to the OPR metrics listed in the respective posts. I assumed #1 seed always picks #2, #3 picks #4, etc. - at all times, the team "on the clock" picks the highest OPR team available in the pool. The selection order is 1-8, 1-8, 8-1, as previously noted.

Bjenks548

17-05-2012, 12:32

Here is the same list using Most Recent OPR as the sorting mechanism (tiebreaker: Average OPR from the Ed Law spreadsheet):

#4: 254 - 548 - 469 - 233

Same caveat as before: All predictions wrong, or your money back!

I'll take that alliance, but i can't imagine 469 falling to a second pick or 233 as a back up!

Travis Hoffman

17-05-2012, 18:26

Hey all - as long as we are all enjoying eating our pie in the sky (I hear pie goes well with ice cream...), here's a different flavor for you:

This pick list is generated by sorting the IRI invitees by Ed Law's post-championship Worldrank. 1 picks 2, 3 picks 4, yadda yadda yadda.

# A/C Pick1 Pick2 Pick3
1 67 2056 1676 233
2 341 469 829 3322
3 2481 254 48 379
4 1114 118 2054 2614
5 1023 359 1718 744
6 624 548 16 3138
7 2826 973 148 111
8 25 330 340 33

nuggetsyl

17-05-2012, 20:57

They seem to be VERY comparable. 2056-341 are two top-notch scorers, but 341 may have the edge. 469-118 goes to 469, 25-1023 could go either way, since both are stellar, and I think 340-111 actually goes to 340. Both are killer alliances, and any matches pitting one against the other would be sure to include some incredible fireworks. The disparity between #1 & #2 in my mind is the number of long bots. Where 25 and 1023 are fairly comparable, 25 is long with no stabilization device (at least at CMP) while 1023 is wide and possesses a "stinger" (with that said, their 4-wheel-drive makes it nearly impossible to hang very much of their robot off the end of the bridge. Watch any of quarterfinal 3 at the Michigan State Championship and you'll see the rather painful truth there) I think for pure shooting power, #1 is my favorite, while for balancing potential, I give #2 a slight edge

We have a stinger. We did not have the weight for it at champs. But the question really is, do we need a stinger?

J_Miles

17-05-2012, 22:08

We have a stinger. We did not have the weight for it at champs. But the question really is, do we need a stinger?

That certainly depends. In the scenario outlined, it would certainly be beneficial, where another long 'bot is present. However, I concede that it is not always necessary, especially considering the amount of length your robot is capable of extending over the end of the bridge.

nuggetsyl

17-05-2012, 22:10

That certainly depends. In the scenario outlined, it would certainly be beneficial, where another long 'bot is present. However, I concede that it is not always necessary, especially considering the amount of length your robot is capable of extending over the end of the bridge.

I will make sure the stinger comes along for the ride. I would hate to not be picked because we left it at home.

Ekcrbe

17-05-2012, 23:27

I'll take that alliance, but i can't imagine 469 falling to a second pick or 233 as a back up!

Wow. I just noticed that. I would definitely see 469 going in the 1st 4 picks or being a captain. 233 is definitely in the top 2 rounds, and both 1114 and 111 seem to have fallen a little far in Jared341's latest simulation.

JosephC

18-05-2012, 00:00

Gregor

18-05-2012, 00:01

Ouch, apparently 68's World Rank sucks. I'm guessing it factors in data from before Worlds?

Yes, Ed Law's Database includes all events attended per team.

Debbie

18-05-2012, 00:02

. Where 25 and 1023 are fairly comparable, 25 is long with no stabilization device (at least at CMP) while 1023 is wide and possesses a "stinger" (with that said, their 4-wheel-drive makes it nearly impossible to hang very much of their robot off the end of the bridge. Watch any of quarterfinal 3 at the Michigan State Championship and you'll see the rather painful truth there)
Just to throw out my 2 cents, since this bothers me a little each time i see "rather painful truth" reposted.. :D 1023 DID balance in QF3 with you .. and everyone was on their feet screaming for the double triple... then the power went off for the end of match.. and the ball wedged between the two of you pushed you off the balance making the triple not count. So, I'm not sure I agree with your "rather painful truth" :D We balanced 4 times in Detroit without the stinger, we balanced on several practice fields, and had the ball not been wedged between you two, we would have balanced at states. :D We enjoyed playing with you at states, and look forward to seeing you at upcoming events. Maybe we will have a chance to retry that balance again.

JosephC

18-05-2012, 00:06

Yes, Ed Law's Database includes all events attended per team.

That'd do it, we were absolutely horrible before we redesigned our shooter before Worlds.

Travis Hoffman

18-05-2012, 10:39

Yes, Ed Law's Database includes all events attended per team.

I'd like to think of it as a decent measure of extended consistency across many matches and events.

Akash Rastogi

18-05-2012, 11:02

That certainly depends. In the scenario outlined, it would certainly be beneficial, where another long 'bot is present. However, I concede that it is not always necessary, especially considering the amount of length your robot is capable of extending over the end of the bridge.

If you've seen 25's weight distribution in person, you'll find that a stinger isn't exactly needed in most scenarios.

Clinton Bolinger

18-05-2012, 11:38

Just to throw out my 2 cents, since this bothers me a little each time i see "rather painful truth" reposted.. :D 1023 DID balance in QF3 with you .. and everyone was on their feet screaming for the double triple... then the power went off for the end of match.. and the ball wedged between the two of you pushed you off the balance making the triple not count. So, I'm not sure I agree with your "rather painful truth" :D We balanced 4 times in Detroit without the stinger, we balanced on several practice fields, and had the ball not been wedged between you two, we would have balanced at states. :D We enjoyed playing with you at states, and look forward to seeing you at upcoming events. Maybe we will have a chance to retry that balance again.

Debbie, I would have to say missing that triple balance was more our fault then 1023s. We should have seen that ball and cleared it out of the way.

Per usual your team has a great robot and is always fun to play with behind the glass. I look forward to seeing your team at almost all of our off season events (IGVC, MARC, IRI, and Kettering!?).

Also for the off season events we have some Rumble Pi that we are adding to our bot to help prevent the problem we had at MSC.

-Clinton-

Debbie

18-05-2012, 12:46

Debbie, I would have to say missing that triple balance was more our fault then 1023s. We should have seen that ball and cleared it out of the way.

Per usual your team has a great robot and is always fun to play with behind the glass. I look forward to seeing your team at almost all of our off season events (IGVC, MARC, IRI, and Kettering!?).

Also for the off season events we have some Rumble Pi that we are adding to our bot to help prevent the problem we had at MSC.

-Clinton- I think it was a great first attempt for our alliance. Not sure you could've seen that ball if you tried. I didn't even notice it in the stands after you were up. Had to ask Nick what happened because we were all balanced and still and then poof, we were tumbling. Hard to believe that a little nerf ball can push that big bot. (darn physics) LOL I wish we would have been able to advance further and play more with you! But definitely looking forward to that opportunity this summer. :)

We are trying to decide how best to use our 5 pounds also. Adding extra wheels is certainly something we have contemplated, even for worlds, but our autonomous was running so well, we didn't want to risk messing that up. Now that we have time to tinker, the team is trying to make a decision which add on would be best. Plus, waiting to see if we have additional weight at MARC or not before we dig in too much.

George1902

19-05-2012, 17:40

With a field of shooters this deep, I have only one prediction / word of advice:

Pick 16 in the first round or get ready to be beaten by them.

Richard Wallace

19-05-2012, 18:39

Pick 16 in the first round or get ready to be beaten by them.Word.

Ya can't shoot 'em if ya ain't got 'em.

Grim Tuesday

19-05-2012, 20:11

That'd do it, we were absolutely horrible before we redesigned our shooter before Worlds.

I think that 68 is going to surprise everyone at IRI, just like they did on Newton. We were running a strategy where 68 did all the shooting and 330 and us (639) stayed back feeding, almost 1717 esque. It was the same strategy that 1717/330 used to win CVR. In the semifinal match that we played against them where everyone was working, 68 managed to match most of 1717's shooting. I'm still not sure why 469 was doing exclusive feeding throughout much of elims.

Ekcrbe

19-05-2012, 20:21

I think that 68 is going to surprise everyone at IRI, just like they did on Newton. We were running a strategy where 68 did all the shooting and 330 and us (639) stayed back feeding, almost 1717 esque. It was the same strategy that 1717/330 used to win CVR. In the semifinal match that we played against them where everyone was working, 68 managed to match most of 1717's shooting. I'm still not sure why 469 was doing exclusive feeding throughout much of elims.

We're still working on the last couple things, and hoping to up our game even more for IRI. It looks like the plans include a new Driver Station, definitely not fitted with the Classmate.

AdamHeard

19-05-2012, 22:26

With a field of shooters this deep, I have only one prediction / word of advice:

Pick 16 in the first round or get ready to be beaten by them.

16 was certainly good at the strategy they played in the championship elims, but any number of good shooters could do the exact same thing well. IRI is full of such teams.

Gregor

19-05-2012, 22:37

16 was certainly good at the strategy they played in the championship elims, but any number of good shooters could do the exact same thing well. IRI is full of such teams.

But their maneuverability and their consistant autonomous sets the Bomb Squad apart.

XaulZan11

19-05-2012, 23:01

I'm curious to see how 16 plays in qualification matches at IRI. The championship ended very well for them, but I'm sure they aren't too pleased with their offensive showing. Don't forget that they were one of the 5-10 best offensive robots before the championship. Will they take the time this summer to fine tune their shooter or just play the feeding role at IRI?

I tend not to put too much effort into trying to predict IRI results. Too many teams use brand new drivers and there are some differences in how serious take the event. (everyone trys to win, but some teams prepare for it like its the championship with a full practice schedule).

Bjenks548

20-05-2012, 21:44

I don't see why people are so convinced one robot has to feed. I realize there is a limited number of balls this year, but 3 scorers is better then 2... but only if your smart.

Ekcrbe

20-05-2012, 21:53

I don't see why people are so convinced one robot has to feed. I realize there is a limited number of balls this year, but 3 scorers is better then 2... but only if your smart.

The thought is that there will be too much traffic and alliance members will start bumping into each other while shooting, and everyone will waste time crossing the field (I'm not fully convinced either). It could work, however.

JosephC

20-05-2012, 22:16

I don't see why people are so convinced one robot has to feed. I realize there is a limited number of balls this year, but 3 scorers is better then 2... but only if your smart.

I agree. I've ranked the main strategies I've seen by level of how difficult they appear to be.

1. 3 shooters (Offensive Option)
This requires timing and strategy, you can't have 3 robots all trying to fire simultaneously. Optimally there'd be 1 robot shooting, 1 robot lining up/getting into position, and 1 robot collecting balls at any given moment.
Difficult, but not impossible.

2. "Full Court Press" - 1 shooter, 2 feeders (Defensive Option)
This was a strategy that we deployed during the Newton eliminations, coined by 330/639. Essentially you have 2 robots on the opposing side of the field feeding one main shooter on your side of the field. This keeps the balls away from your opponents and on your side of the field.
Medium, Greatly increases your chance of getting penalties due to defense.

3. 1 feeder 2 shooters (Offensive Option)
This strategy was used quite often during eliminations. It allowed you to almost always having a robot trying to score, and keeps some of the balls away from your opponents.
Easy, Less timing then #1 and less chance of penalties then #2.

Thoughts?

AlecMataloni

21-05-2012, 16:11

My (improbable) Predictions:

118 seeds second, snags 341, 2054, 234, in that order. Plays the #1 seed 2056, 67, 548, and 27 alliance in the finals and #2 wins after losing the first match.

JosephC

21-05-2012, 22:03

My (improbable) Predictions:

118 seeds second, snags 341, 2054, 234, in that order. Plays the #1 seed 2056, 67, 548, and 27 alliance in the finals and #2 wins after losing the first match.

We are assuming that 548 (1st seed and Winners of Newton) are making it back to 2nd pick?

Karibou

21-05-2012, 22:28

We are assuming that 548 (1st seed and Winners of Newton) are making it back to 2nd pick?

Anything can happen at IRI...

stundt1

21-05-2012, 22:30

Anything can happen at IRI...
Simbotics lost last year anything can happen.....

LeelandS

21-05-2012, 22:38

We are assuming that 548 (1st seed and Winners of Newton) are making it back to 2nd pick?

Like they said. Anything can happen. 548 may fall down the list for being a primary fender shooter. That being said, if they can get their key shooting up to the level of a bot designed for key shooting (like 469, 67, 1114, etc...), that may not happen. But great robots have a tendency to not get picked early on at IRI. Only the best robots get picked early on at IRI.

For example, 2016 last year. Number one seed and winner on Archimedes. Fell to the last pick of the regular draft (second pick of 8th alliance). It's not that they were bad. They were amazing. But at IRI, amazing is good and perfect is great.

CalTran

21-05-2012, 22:46

perfect is great.
I think it's more "perfection is the expectation"

Anyways, on the prediction side, it's a little rocky to make the prediction, but it's sure as heck fun to watch them unfold in anticipation for the big event.

AlecMataloni

22-05-2012, 00:01

We are assuming that 548 (1st seed and Winners of Newton) are making it back to 2nd pick?

67 and 217 were both second round picks last year. 548's a great team, but even great teams get drafted late or skipped altogether at IRI.

Bjenks548

22-05-2012, 18:42

Like they said. Anything can happen. 548 may fall down the list for being a primary fender shooter. That being said, if they can get their key shooting up to the level of a bot designed for key shooting (like 469, 67, 1114, etc...), that may not happen. But great robots have a tendency to not get picked early on at IRI. Only the best robots get picked early on at IRI.

We defiantly prefer the fender, but teams stopped defending us after we made some improvements. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njX77IjxRVg&feature=BFa&list=PLE37AAE1E41CA841A)

JosephC

22-05-2012, 18:49

We defiantly prefer the fender, but teams stopped defending us after we made some improvements. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njX77IjxRVg&feature=BFa&list=PLE37AAE1E41CA841A)

We tried our best, but once you got the key shooting down we couldn't stop you.

Bjenks548

11-06-2012, 10:43

Chris is me

11-06-2012, 11:01

This thread has been dead a little too long so...

The winning alliance will have how many long/wide bots?

At least 2 wide. A two long triple balance is sometimes possible, but the 3rd round allows for teams to pick another wide as a backup and determine which teams would best fit on the bridge together.

Will all alliances be able to triple balance and if not, do they stand a chance?

Yes, the triple balance will be mandatory if the Championship ruling on defense is kept (which, IMO, it should be). With 4 robots, it's too easy to form an alliance that can do it.

What will the Coop bridge % be durring qualifications?

Barring rule changes, 90%.

Will we finnaly see the super starve strategy (6 with hp 9 on robots and 2 on bridge)?

Probably not to that extent, since robots have to drive on that bridge...

Will any long bots go as a third pick?

Moreso than at the Championship because teams may have a 4th pick in their pocket :P

LeelandS

11-06-2012, 11:15

This thread has been dead a little too long so...

The winning alliance will have how many long/wide bots?
Will all alliances be able to triple balance and if not, do they stand a chance?
What will the Coop bridge % be durring qualifications?
Will we finnaly see the super starve strategy (6 with hp 9 on robots and 2 on bridge)?
Will any long bots go as a third pick?

My guesses,
1 long 2 wide
All will be able to, if not there is no chance
90%
No, people like scoring more
Only if there's already 3 wide bots on the alliance

I'll try my hat at some of these:

2 wide, 1 long robot certainly would be most likely. I, however, feel that the winning alliance will actually be 2 long, 1 wide.

I'm still not sure how we define "able to triple balance", but I think we'll see at least one alliance advance past the quarterfinals without triple balancing. I don't see an alliance winning IRI without tripling at least once, however. Though, Einstein was won on double balances. So I wouldn't say it's impossible. Smart alliance may see the advantage of scoring the heck out of a match and doubling versus taking the risk of tripling, much like 1717 often did in matches (score as much as possible while their partners balanced).

I'd expect a 98% coop balance, if not 100%. There will be an attempt every match, and maybe a slip up or two. But considering the overall quality of team's at IRI, the general consensus that cooping is necessary to compete well, and the number of teams who will probably be practicing balancing and possibly even installing stingers/balancing aids of some kind, balancing on the coop bridge will be a very common occurance.

I don't see that starving strategy really being effective. Teams of IRI caliber could make much better use of those balls by putting them to use in hoops. I think you'll see it attempted at least once, and that match will be extremely slow, but I don't think one alliance will be able to control every ball. Especially since getting balls from the alliance bridge in hybrid seems to be a huge advantage for an alliance, and will be attempted more.

Absolutely. But I doubt it will be because of their orientation. Great teams go to the third pick all the time, so I think long robots will absolutely go to the third pick. But wide robots will, too.

akoscielski3

11-06-2012, 11:45

I don't see that starving strategy really being effective. Teams of IRI caliber could make much better use of those balls by putting them to use in hoops. I think you'll see it attempted at least once, and that match will be extremely slow, but I don't think one alliance will be able to control every ball. Especially since getting balls from the alliance bridge in hybrid seems to be a huge advantage for an alliance, and will be attempted more.

I doubt that getting the Co-op bridge in hybrid will be as big as in other competitons. Since only 2 balls will most likely be on the bridge at once (most robots will have their balls in the robot).

I do expect more feeding to happen and a few robots get the balls off the alliance bridge and score them. Either way Hybrid will be not as big of a part of the game as in other competitions. I actually think the only really different part will be Teleop. But we'll have to wait and see about that.

CalTran

11-06-2012, 12:01

I doubt that getting the Co-op bridge in hybrid will be as big as in other competitons. Since only 2 balls will most likely be on the bridge at once (most robots will have their balls in the robot).

Either way Hybrid will be not as big of a part of the game as in other competitions.

Guess 5 ball autonomous modes are a thing of the past now. Darn. Oh well.

Anyways, I'd say that the 2 wide, 1 long sounds like a pretty good pairing, though with 1717 running swerve and 469 being a square, it's hard to classify them when they win... :rolleyes:

As said before, with a 4 bot alliance, they'll be able to triple, but only if it is to their advantage to do so. As one of our mentors said, rather optimistically,
Balancing won't matter if we score 300 balls a match.

LeelandS

11-06-2012, 12:21

I doubt that getting the Co-op bridge in hybrid will be as big as in other competitons. Since only 2 balls will most likely be on the bridge at once (most robots will have their balls in the robot).

I do expect more feeding to happen and a few robots get the balls off the alliance bridge and score them. Either way Hybrid will be not as big of a part of the game as in other competitions. I actually think the only really different part will be Teleop. But we'll have to wait and see about that.

I find that an interesting hypothesis.

It seems to me Hybrid will be a huge part of the game, especially when it comes to acquiring and scoring balls from the alliance and coopertition bridge. If you have two alliances, both capable of hitting all 6 preloaded balls in Hybrid (like I'm sure will happen quite often), then acquiring an extra 24 points (12 from the coop, 12 from the alliance) seems like it would be huge. You start out teleoperated with your opponents in a 24 point hole that they have to climb out of. A very nice advantage to start with.

I'd like to hear your reasoning behind saying Hybrid will be less important. I definitely find it to be an interesting statement.

akoscielski3

11-06-2012, 13:01

I find that an interesting hypothesis.

It seems to me Hybrid will be a huge part of the game, especially when it comes to acquiring and scoring balls from the alliance and coopertition bridge. If you have two alliances, both capable of hitting all 6 preloaded balls in Hybrid (like I'm sure will happen quite often), then acquiring an extra 24 points (12 from the coop, 12 from the alliance) seems like it would be huge. You start out teleoperated with your opponents in a 24 point hole that they have to climb out of. A very nice advantage to start with.

I'd like to hear your reasoning behind saying Hybrid will be less important. I definitely find it to be an interesting statement.

I can/will expand on this later but for now...

Alliance A: gets the Co-op bridge balls
Alliance B: doesnt get alliance bridge balls

1. You said that there would be a 24 point difference. But who said that alliance B doesnt get the 2 balls from their allaince bridge and scores those for 12 points. the the differnece is only a MAX of 12 points.

2. When Alliance A scores their 2 extra balls, then Allaince B (human players) has control of those balls and Hopefully delivers those balls to their side of the field. Helping them score more. Assuming the score is tied and they score those balls the score will be 6 point difference now for Alliance A.

At this point Aliance B only is losing by 6. Easy enough to come back from. Then it comes down to the remaining Teleop and the Bridge Points.

Notice that most of this was displayed at GTR west when 1114 and 2056 played against eachother. (meaning when delsivering balls and easily coming back from losing in hybrid) the alliance bridge was not yet perfected.

Remember this will most likely not happen but also realize that hybrid will not be everything.

Chris is me

11-06-2012, 13:14

Though, Einstein was one on double balances. So I wouldn't say it's impossible.

Yeah, you just have to make sure the field knocks out the third robot of all the alliances that needed to triple balance. :P

I wouldn't use Einstein as an indicator for the style of play you'd see at IRI for that reason. The Archimedes finals I think are a great example of how IRI may end up playing out.

LeelandS

11-06-2012, 13:21

I can/will expance on this later but for now...

Alliance A: gets the Co-op bridge balls
Alliance B: doesnt get alliance bridge balls

1. You said that there would be a 24 point difference. But who said that alliance B doesnt get the 2 balls from their allaince bridge and scores those for 12 points. the the differnece is only a MAX of 12 points.

2. When Alliance A scores their 2 extra balls, then Allaince B (human players) has control of those balls and Hopefully delivers those balls to their side of the field. Helping them score more. Assuming the score is tied and they score those balls the score will be 6 point difference now for Alliance A.

At this point Aliance B only is losing by 6. Easy enough to come back from. Then it comes down to the remaining Teleop and the Bridge Points.

Notice that most of this was displayed at GTR west when 1114 and 2056 played against eachother. (meaning when delsivering balls and easily coming back from losing in hybrid) the alliance bridge was not yet perfected.

Remember this will most likely not happen but also realize that hybrid will not be everything.

Of course Hybrid won't be everything. There is never a part of a game that is "everything".

So, using your terms, we'll say this:
Alliance A gets from the Coop Bridge and the Alliance Bridge
Alliance B gets from the Alliance Bridge

It's true, that if Alliance A gets Coop and Alliance bridge balls, and Alliance B gets their alliance balls, then there is only a 12 point spread. But still, I'd rather be up 12 points than tied.

And again, yes, then Human Players B will be in control of some extra balls. But if Alliance A puts in 10 balls in 15 seconds, that's a bit for those human players to sort through with their 6 ball maximum. So there's a chance that they'll have to just drop some, or even incur some penalties.

Even if that doesn't happen, if Alliance A puts in 10 balls, and Alliance B puts in 8, then the score is 60 to 48, in favor of Alliance A. Alliance A has 8 balls being sent to them by their human players, Alliance B has 10. If all those balls get put in, Alliance A will have 60 + 3(8) = 84. And Alliance B will have 48 + 3(10) = 78. Still in favor of Alliance A. Then, repeating the cycle after that, Alliance A will have 10 balls coming to them, and Alliance B will have 8. Alliance A can get a score of 84 + 3(10) = 114, while Alliance B gets 78 + 3(8) = 102. Again, favor to Alliance A.

At that point, Alliance B NEEDS a triple balance. With a double balance or less, Alliance A just needs to balance one robot to get the win. It still does come down to balancing, but Alliance B NEEDS to get that triple right, which causes more pressure, which, of course, causes mistakes. If it's a qualification round where triple balances are scored the same a double balances, hope for Alliance B looks very dim.

Normally, I wouldn't operate under the assumption that all Human Players get every ball across the field, and every balls gets put in each time, but at IRI, the caliber of many alliance will allow that.

I feel as though something in my logic is a bit off, but it seems to me that, any way you slice it, getting from the Coop and Alliance bridge is a huge advantage.

Yeah, you just have to make sure the field knocks out the third robot of all the alliances that needed to triple balance. :P

I wouldn't use Einstein as an indicator for the style of play you'd see at IRI for that reason. The Archimedes finals I think are a great example of how IRI may end up playing out.

I'd definitely agree about using Einstein. I was just pointing out that you don't need to triple to win at a high level. But you're definitely right on that one.

As for Archimedes, I'd definitely agree on that one as well. The matches are going to be "shooting-and-scoring" extravaganzas, and it's going to come down to who can lock the right balance.

akoscielski3

11-06-2012, 13:37

Of course Hybrid won't be everything. There is never a part of a game that is "everything".

So, using your terms, we'll say this:
Alliance A gets from the Coop Bridge and the Alliance Bridge
Alliance B gets from the Alliance Bridge

It's true, that if Alliance A gets Coop and Alliance bridge balls, and Alliance B gets their alliance balls, then there is only a 12 point spread. But still, I'd rather be up 12 points than tied.

And again, yes, then Human Players B will be in control of some extra balls. But if Alliance A puts in 10 balls in 15 seconds, that's a bit for those human players to sort through with their 6 ball maximum. So there's a chance that they'll have to just drop some, or even incur some penalties.

Even if that doesn't happen, if Alliance A puts in 10 balls, and Alliance B puts in 8, then the score is 60 to 48, in favor of Alliance A. Alliance A has 8 balls being sent to them by their human players, Alliance B has 10. If all those balls get put in, Alliance A will have 60 + 3(8) = 84. And Alliance B will have 48 + 3(10) = 78. Still in favor of Alliance A. Then, repeating the cycle after that, Alliance A will have 10 balls coming to them, and Alliance B will have 8. Alliance A can get a score of 84 + 3(10) = 114, while Alliance B gets 78 + 3(8) = 102. Again, favor to Alliance A.

At that point, Alliance B NEEDS a triple balance. With a double balance or less, Alliance A just needs to balance one robot to get the win. It still does come down to balancing, but Alliance B NEEDS to get that triple right, which causes more pressure, which, of course, causes mistakes. If it's a qualification round where triple balances are scored the same a double balances, hope for Alliance B looks very dim.

Normally, I wouldn't operate under the assumption that all Human Players get every ball across the field, and every balls gets put in each time, but at IRI, the caliber of many alliance will allow that.

I feel as though something in my logic is a bit off, but it seems to me that, any way you slice it, getting from the Coop and Alliance bridge is a huge advantage.

Yea I understand what you are saying. But that is in a perfect match, but again the hybrid i mentioned is a perfect hybrid.

I guess we can both agree that IRI will be crazy!

Gregor

11-06-2012, 15:56

I guess we can both agree that IRI will be crazy!

Is it ever not?

akoscielski3

11-06-2012, 16:08

Is it ever not?

Well I only got to see a little bit of last years, and this is my first time getting to go, sooo i guess i Dont know :P But i hear is awesome ;)

LeelandS

11-06-2012, 16:41

Yea I understand what you are saying. But that is in a perfect match, but again the hybrid i mentioned is a perfect hybrid.

I guess we can both agree that IRI will be crazy!

Absolutely! Competition at IRI is ALWAYS intense and insane! I can't wait to see how things play out.

akoscielski3

11-06-2012, 17:00

Absolutely! Competition at IRI is ALWAYS intense and insane! I can't wait to see how things play out.

UNLESS, the FMS dies... :$

LeelandS

11-06-2012, 17:34

UNLESS, the FMS dies... :$

If the field gives out at IRI, I'm rage quitting FIRST. Okay, well... Maybe not. But I'll write a strongly worded letter to SOMEBODY!

Ekcrbe

11-06-2012, 18:05

This thread has been dead a little too long so...
...
Will all alliances be able to triple balance and if not, do they stand a chance?
What will the Coop bridge % be durring qualifications?
...
My guesses,
...
All will be able to, if not there is no chance
90%
...

These I could see being a little different.

Alliances that double and leave a fantastic (even by IRI standards) shooter to have free reign on the field could be able to score 7 balls (21 points) in 30 seconds, or 10 seconds a clip (likely more like 12-12-6 seconds if the last reload is less than 3 balls). That would make up for the triple balance. But everyone probably will be able to, yes.

Coop percentage might be lower than 90%--I would expect 83-85%--because, with the field being so strong, everybody will be trying to outscore each other in Teleop, they will start stretching the limits of how fast the Coop can happen, and they will start failing. The first third of Qualification Matches will probably have a Coop rate of 84-86%, the second third will see a 6-8 point increase in score per alliance, but a Coop rate of more like 77-79%. The final third will see match scores fall back to that of the early matches, and even 2-4 points lower, and the Coop rate rise to 88-90% as teams push to Coop more reliably, remembering its importance in the standings. The Coop Attempt rate will likely be around 99%, but some attempts will just not pan out for various reasons.

EricH

11-06-2012, 18:08

If the field gives out at IRI, I'm rage quitting FIRST. Okay, well... Maybe not. But I'll write a strongly worded letter to SOMEBODY!
If the field gives out at IRI, I think FRC HQ will get word very quickly via more official channels. Along with the diagnosis of as many people who deal with that sort of thing for a living as happen to be there and looking over the field...

But I'm hopeful that the weekend testing went well enough for FIRST to at least replicate the error(s), and better than that, find out how to stop it for good.

LeelandS

11-06-2012, 18:31

If the field gives out at IRI, I think FRC HQ will get word very quickly via more official channels. Along with the diagnosis of as many people who deal with that sort of thing for a living as happen to be there and looking over the field...

But I'm hopeful that the weekend testing went well enough for FIRST to at least replicate the error(s), and better than that, find out how to stop it for good.

My post was more of a joke. I'm hoping we'll find the case to be an isolated incident with the Einstein field, and that the field used at most off season events will be more than able to put on the matches we'd expect to see at IRI. If the weekend's diagnostics from FIRST goes well, I'm sure we won't see a problem going into IRI. If they don't provide any conclusive results... Well, that's a problem.

But I'm optimistic that field problems will be resolved going into IRI (even if I have no reason to be optimistic). And I wouldn't be surprised if some FIRST personnel are on-hand at IRI, just in case. I'm sure FIRST is at least a little embarrassed about what happened on Einstein, and, even if IRI isn't an official FIRST sanctioned event, will want everything to be perfect at the biggest off-season event of the year as sort of a redemption.

mikemat

11-06-2012, 21:19

These I could see being a little different.

Alliances that double and leave a fantastic (even by IRI standards) shooter to have free reign on the field could be able to score 7 balls (21 points) in 30 seconds, or 10 seconds a clip (likely more like 12-12-6 seconds if the last reload is less than 3 balls).

I definitely agree 21 pts is possible in 30 seconds (1717 proved it). However, I see triples at IRI, where most teams will probably have some form of balance assist, taking closer to the 15-20 sec. range. And I can't see anyone scoring 20 pts in 15 seconds.
I think at least 2 alliances won't triple, but i believe the winner will. All alliances will have one long, and half will have 2 longs somewhere on the alliance.
Fourth picks will be interesting. I think some alliances will need a wide here to make a triple posible, while others will pick up great robots neglected due to a need for wide bots. That brings up another question. Is the field too deep to pick up a great long bot second and third round, sacrifice the triple, and hope its enough? Or are you not gaining enough over choosing from the crop of already picked-over wide bots?

Ekcrbe

12-06-2012, 09:00

Is the field too deep to pick up a great long bot second and third round, sacrifice the triple, and hope its enough? Or are you not gaining enough over choosing from the crop of already picked-over wide bots?

I think there will be a field plenty deep enough to find wide bots that can be very beneficial during at least the second round. Remember that playing defense (think 16) is going to be just as important as scoring, and finding a great defensive team relies much more on having a good drive team and inter-team chemistry than a first-round scorer, where the robot is critical.

So I think alliances will be able to satisfy their needs with a wide bot, so I don't think there is much to gain taking a long bot with the second or third pick. You would generally take a scorer in the first round, and that's the only role I see a long bot filling. IRI will be made in the last two rounds--there are more than enough teams to create eight incredible pairs up top.

Bjenks548

12-06-2012, 10:02

Here's my best shot at who's long/ wide...
Long- 25, 27, 48, 111, 125, 192 217, 233, 254, 269, 292, 330, 340, 359, 379, 447, 461, 548, 573, 772, 744 781, 971, 1114, 1538, 1676, 1902, 2054, 2056, 2337, 2614 2826, 3310 3138, 3193, 3947
Wide- 33, 45, 51, 67, 68, 118, 148, 234, 245, 269, 292 341, 399, 829, 907, 1023, 1024, 1592, 1714, 1718, 1730, 1732, 2168, 2194, 2481, 2590, 2834, 2949, 3098, 3322, 3357, 3940 4334
Swerve- 16, 71, 973, 1640
Square- 469, 868
Mecanum- 503, 1741

counts: Long 36
Wide:33
Swerve: 4
Square: 2
Mecanum:2
I don't know (need some help): 0

Hopefully I got everyone on the list somewhere!

Nick Lawrence

12-06-2012, 10:20

Here's my best shot at who's long/ wide...
Long- 25, 27, 48, 71, 111, 125, 217, 233, 254, 330, 340, 359, 548, 573, 1114, 1538, 2054, 2056, 2337, 2826
Wide- 33, 45, 51, 67, 68, 118, 148, 234, 245, 341, 399, 1023, 1024, 1718, 1732, 2168, 2194, 2834, 3098, 3322, 3357, 4334
Swerve- 16, 971, 973
Square- 469,
Mecanum- 503
?- 192, 269, 292, 379, 447, 461, 624, 744, 772, 781, 829, 868, 907, 1592, 1640, 1676, 1714, 1730, 1741, 1902, 2481, 2590, 2614, 2949, 3138, 3193, 3940, 3947

Long - 379, 772, 781, 3138, 3193, 1592, 2614
Wide - 1714, 1730, 907
Swerve - 192 I think

971 is not a swerve. They're a longbot.

-Nick

Gregor

12-06-2012, 10:25

Here's my best shot at who's long/ wide...
Long- 25, 27, 48, 71, 111, 125, 217, 233, 254, 330, 340, 359, 548, 573, 1114, 1538, 2054, 2056, 2337, 2826
Wide- 33, 45, 51, 67, 68, 118, 148, 234, 245, 341, 399, 1023, 1024, 1718, 1732, 2168, 2194, 2834, 3098, 3322, 3357, 4334
Swerve- 16, 971, 973
Square- 469,
Mecanum- 503
?- 192, 269, 292, 379, 447, 461, 624, 744, 772, 781, 829, 868, 907, 1592, 1640, 1676, 1714, 1730, 1741, 1902, 2481, 2590, 2614, 2949, 3138, 3193, 3940, 3947

counts: Long 20
Wide:22
Swerve: 3
Square: 1
Mecanum:1
I don't know (need some help): 28

Hopefully I got everyone on the list somewhere!

Long: 772, 781

Wide: 907, 1730, 3940

EDIT: Seems Nick beat me to it.

Kristian Calhoun

12-06-2012, 10:33

Here's my best shot at who's long/ wide...
?- 192, 269, 292, 379, 447, 461, 624, 744, 772, 781, 829, 868, 907, 1592, 1640, 1676, 1714, 1730, 1741, 1902, 2481, 2590, 2614, 2949, 3138, 3193, 3940, 3947

I don't know (need some help): 28

Long: 1676, 1902
Wide: 2590
Swerve: 1640
Square: 868

Aidan S.

12-06-2012, 10:38

Here's my best shot at who's long/ wide...
Long- 25, 27, 48, 71, 111, 125, 217, 233, 254, 330, 340, 359, 548, 573, 1114, 1538, 2054, 2056, 2337, 2826
Wide- 33, 45, 51, 67, 68, 118, 148, 234, 245, 341, 399, 1023, 1024, 1718, 1732, 2168, 2194, 2834, 3098, 3322, 3357, 4334
Swerve- 16, 971, 973
Square- 469,
Mecanum- 503
?- 192, 269, 292, 379, 447, 461, 624, 744, 772, 781, 829, 868, 907, 1592, 1640, 1676, 1714, 1730, 1741, 1902, 2481, 2590, 2614, 2949, 3138, 3193, 3940, 3947

To add to the lists:

Long - 447, 624, 744, 1741
Wide - 269, 292, 2481, 2949, 3940

Also, 192 is a long bot, not a swerve. I checked a picture of them, they have an 8 wheel drive.

Now, the only teams left unknown are 461, 829, and 3947.

Jared Russell

12-06-2012, 10:56

To add to the lists:

Long - 447, 624, 744, 1741
Wide - 269, 292, 2481, 2949, 3940

Also, 192 is a long bot, not a swerve. I checked a picture of them, they have an 8 wheel drive.

Now, the only teams left unknown are 461, 829, and 3947.

461 is long.
829 is wide.
3947 is long.

Gregor

12-06-2012, 11:04

461 is long.
829 is wide.
3947 is long.

That was fast. Thanks CD. Now to start transferring to exel. Sigh.

JohnSchneider

12-06-2012, 12:18

Does nobody care about us because we're long? :(

O'Sancheski

12-06-2012, 13:09

2168 is long.

Bjenks548

12-06-2012, 13:12

Does nobody care about us because we're long? :(

Very sorry I missed your team, I edited my first post and think i have everyone. Also I tend to like long bots as 548 is one!

JohnSchneider

12-06-2012, 13:49

Very sorry I missed your team, I edited my first post and think i have everyone. Also I tend to like long bots as 548 is one!

No problem. :D

bam-bam

12-06-2012, 14:07

71 is swerve, and 1741 has octo-drive, so I guess you could place them under mecanum.

dodar

12-06-2012, 14:25

1592 is Wide.

Chi Meson

12-06-2012, 15:53

2168 is long.
We're "virtually wide" as long as we are on the outside; meaning that we have a mean overhang.
https://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/523682_10100121375674215_1978650014_n.jpg

akoscielski3

12-06-2012, 15:57

We're "virtually wide" as long as we are on the outside; meaning that we have a mean overhang.

This is the same with us. We only take up 22" of the bridge if on the outside. We only attempted to Triple once (Queen City Quarter Finals) But we put our heavy end on the outside and just tipped. We also are able to Line up and shoot 3 balls in 3 seconds (now thats 1717 kind of stuff ;) ). We are hoping to be a pretty good competitor, Cant wait to Compete with all these amazing teams, all at one competition!

Bjenks548

13-06-2012, 11:00

I'm going to guess that most robots can hang quite a bit off the edge. That being said balancing with 2 longs is always harder than 1 long. Personal experience. GTR East QF1-2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYyrLQlU2gA) 1075 and 4307, no balancer with 2 long bots, however 4307 was not even close to max and it went smoothly. Northville (http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL330EC87F58B42405&feature=plcp) QF's SF's and F's 5 triples with 2 wides, 67 and 3656, using 67's arm... Extremely smooth. Troy finals 2, 217(long) and 2604 attempted to triple, we failed to do so. MSC 2054 (long) and 245 it worked (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnuRiag6DaM) but wasn't pretty and we failed to do this twice. Finally Newton (http://www.youtube.com/user/steverk100) 118 and 2194 both wide, utilizing 118's stinger and our fangs, 4-6 with 2 driver errors keeping us from 6-6 (QF 1-1 half of us were going for a double).
Experience has shown me that our 19" needed on the bridge is a little more then that depending on the speed of a balancer as the rotational momentum of the robot tips it down and sometimes off the bridge (problem solved by using 2 balancers).

Starke

13-06-2012, 11:02

I'm going to guess that most robots can hang quite a bit off the edge.

This is definitely true with 340. Around 12" overhang! Check out the video below!

http://youtu.be/Ar6CMCwlW5k

Matt

jdunston94

14-06-2012, 14:00

How many teams will not have the ability to use their drivers that the had during the regular season? Or will choose to use other drivers for expiriance purposes?

Jay O'Donnell

14-06-2012, 14:06

Very excited for IRI this year! I hope to see New England teams 2168 and 125 do as well as they can! I personnally see an alliance led by 67 (The HOT Team) and 341 (Miss Daisy) taking it all. This is going to be alot of fun to watch and interesting to see who prevails!

akoscielski3

14-06-2012, 21:45

Gregor

14-06-2012, 21:46

The EH Team is gonna win it all. ;)

+ one mysterious backup bot

CalTran

14-06-2012, 21:54

The EH Team is gonna win it all. ;)

Perhaps with another Canadian to continue the Eh Team? :cough:772:cough:

akoscielski3

14-06-2012, 22:23

Perhaps with another Canadian to continue the Eh Team? :cough:772:cough:

Oh what I would do for this to happen...

Gregor

15-06-2012, 00:25

Duke461

15-06-2012, 00:48

I notice that 269 and 292 are mentioned twice. Does anyone know which drive orientation they are?

EDIT: 624 is missing from this list, but they have accepted as per http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1172523&postcount=9

269 is wide.
292 is long.
624 is long.

Gregor

15-06-2012, 00:53

269 is wide.
292 is long.
624 is long.

thanks

Mr. Lim

15-06-2012, 09:03

Perhaps with another Canadian to continue the Eh Team? :cough:772:cough:

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/22038197.jpg

With 772, 781 and 907 attending in addition to the original "Eh Team" there will be no shortage of Canadian representation :cool:.

Bjenks548

15-06-2012, 09:51

Here's another fun question...
You seeded first, you have 0 scouting, all you know is how the teams did in the regular season... who do you pick?

My top 3 are 67, 118, and 341. Being a long bot I wouldn't take the risk of 1114, 2056, or other great long bots.
67- Worked with and won an Northville together, great team, amazing robot, and from Michigan!
118- Worked with and won Newton together, got along great, make another run at gold?
341- never worked together or even saw their robot in person... but Masters of hybrid could make all the difference.

iVanDuzer

15-06-2012, 10:43

akoscielski3

15-06-2012, 11:04

I'm finding it sort of strange, especially after the speed and success of the Eh Team, that everyone still seems to doubt two long bots and one wide can triple as effectively as two wide and one long...

I think they are just saying it will be tougher to achieve. Plus keep in mind that 4334 was a lot smaller than normal wide bots. On friday at GTR west 1114, 2056, and 3161 tried triple on the practice field. 3161 is a normal wide bot. They got it but after a fair amout of attempts. Another note in GTR west was that 2056, and 188 denied 1241 because they both didnt want a long bot with them. You can see how good of a choice that was after 2056 won with a triple.

iVanDuzer

15-06-2012, 11:36

I think they are just saying it will be tougher to achieve. Plus keep in mind that 4334 was a lot smaller than normal wide bots. On friday at GTR west 1114, 2056, and 3161 tried triple on the practice field. 3161 is a normal wide bot. They got it but after a fair amout of attempts. Another note in GTR west was that 2056, and 188 denied 1241 because they both didnt want a long bot with them. You can see how good of a choice that was after 2056 won with a triple.
I know 4334 was much smaller, but I also know that they DID triple with 2852 (I think... whoever DM high Voltage is) in practice in prep for Worlds. I also know that 1241's bridge balancer was untested at GTRE, or that it was deemed unreliable enough to not risk a shot at a regional title (the Coop almost-triple on Newton proves as much). If teams have good and *proven* stingers, then long bots can definitely hang with long bots. And I'd be surprised if the majority of competitive long bots don't have a stinger.

Triple balancing is full of risks to begin with. See 2826+67+4143. Here we have probably the best balancer in FIRST consistently fail to triple with one long bot (sorry to rub it in, huge respect to that whole alliance). It's a risky enough maneuver that not a single triple was attempted on Einstein (comm issues didn't help either). People seem to be discounting a long+long+wide balance because it's too risky. I'm just saying that in many cases, especially with these robots, wide+wide+long or wide+wide+wide is risky as well.

Gregor

15-06-2012, 11:44

I also know that 1241's bridge balancer was untested at GTRE, or that it was deemed unreliable enough to not risk a shot at a regional title (the Coop almost-triple on Newton proves as much). If teams have good and *proven* stingers, then long bots can definitely hang with long bots. And I'd be surprised if the majority of competitive long bots don't have a stinger.

I would hardly count the failed triple on the coop bridge on Newton as an indication that 1241 can't triple. I doubt that it was planned.

Ekcrbe

15-06-2012, 11:52

Watching that from the stands, it was pretty much solid and then someone moved, trying to go back to just a regular coop. If they were trying to, I think that balance would have stuck.

iVanDuzer

15-06-2012, 12:44

I would hardly count the failed triple on the coop bridge on Newton as an indication that 1241 can't triple. I doubt that it was planned.

I heard that it was planned by the participating teams. Also, I wasn't saying that 1241 can't triple, just that they haven't shown that they can yet. And for teams that rely on scouting (like both 2056 and 188), what you say you can do doesn't matter; it's what you actually do on the field that counts.

Regardless, I still say that people are discounting long robots or perhaps overemphasizing the importance of wide robots in terms of triple balances. After all, if there's anywhere robots will hang impossibly far off the end of the bridge, it's IRI.

Watching that from the stands, it was pretty much solid and then someone moved, trying to go back to just a regular coop. If they were trying to, I think that balance would have stuck.
Ahh, ok. I was watching from the Archimedes stands, so obviously my view of the event was rather poor. It was looking rather shaky even before they all slid off, but once again, I didn't have that great of an angle.

AdamHeard

15-06-2012, 12:48

Watching that from the stands, it was pretty much solid and then someone moved, trying to go back to just a regular coop. If they were trying to, I think that balance would have stuck.

Wait, so someone tried to triple on the co-op bridge in a qualifying match?

JosephC

15-06-2012, 12:58

Wait, so someone tried to triple on the co-op bridge in a qualifying match?

Yes.

AdamHeard

15-06-2012, 13:06

Yes.

That seems like a horrible idea that is likely just going to end up blowing the co-op points for the entire alliance.

Were they successful?

Ekcrbe

15-06-2012, 13:10

As an observer, I think what actually happened was that 1241's partner died or had difficulty getting on the bridge, so they went to help. After pushing them up and trying to drive away, 1241 remained partially on the bridge and stayed there as the bridge leveled, hanging surprisingly far off. After a few seconds (Okay it felt like a few seconds, I have no idea how long it was), someone (610?) began jumping back and forth, and 1241 fell off just before the match ended.

It was most likely not planned, and nobody was really sure if the triple would have even counted had it remained.

I was actually sitting immediately behind 1241 in the stands, and they all freaked out when it happened, so I could be misremembering.

LeelandS

15-06-2012, 13:12

That seems like a horrible idea that is likely just going to end up blowing the co-op points for the entire alliance.

Were they successful?

They were unsuccessful, though they were astoundingly close. From what I could tell over the webcast, they pretty much had it set in place before somebody moved and collapsed the whole thing.

I don't know why exactly they did it, but when 1241 boarded the co-op bridge, I can say it was the most confusing moment of the season for me.

akoscielski3

15-06-2012, 13:14

Canadians these days...
;)

Jay O'Donnell

15-06-2012, 14:13

The EH Team is gonna win it all. ;)

I saw them compete on Archimedes, and I have no doubt that if they team up they'll be a tough team to beat. No matter what this is going to be fun to watch!

AlecMataloni

15-06-2012, 15:02

Jay O'Donnell

15-06-2012, 15:19

Here's a video of the attempt:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMYzlay3nHI&list=UUqm4SpmkRy7NgaAC-z1Twww&index=1&feature=plcp

DISCLAIMER: My team was not informed of the decision made by our partners. You can imagine the drive team's confusion when they saw what was happening.

Thanks for the video this really clears up what happened. It doesn't seemed to have been planned, but a strange situation nonetheless.

Jay O'Donnell

15-06-2012, 15:27

Is this suppose to show the Triple Co-op attempt? cause I cant see it...

Yes it is, actually it's the entire match video, that ends with the attempted triple co-op

akoscielski3

15-06-2012, 15:31

okay, dont mean to blame it on anyone, but you can see 610 runs into the blue bot, which makes them roll off.

AdamHeard

15-06-2012, 18:35

I'm finding it sort of strange, especially after the speed and success of the Eh Team, that everyone still seems to doubt two long bots and one wide can triple as effectively as two wide and one long...

You're referring to a single data point. That data point also included two of the best robots this year, and a purposefully short robot to make it easier to triple.

We all know two longs can triple, but we can all agree that the more wide robots on the alliance, the easier it *should* be to triple (with all other factors the same).

That being said, at least one elim alliance will triple with two longs at IRI.

mikemat

15-06-2012, 19:11

I'm finding it sort of strange, especially after the speed and success of the Eh Team, that everyone still seems to doubt two long bots and one wide can triple as effectively as two wide and one long...

I can tell you from experience, it wont be close to as effective as two wides. The EH balance was with 4334, who was probably chosen largely for their size. When we tried tripling at MSC with two long bots, both of which could hang pretty far, we were 1/3. The EH team proved it doable, but those circumstances were a bit special. 4334 will be the only sub max dimension at IRI (I believe), so 2 long alliances will either need to pick them or try their luck with a full size wide. Two stingers should make it easier (they might have saved us once at MSC ), but it wont be as easy as 1114, 2056, and 1114 made it look.

IndySam

15-06-2012, 19:16

269 is wide.
292 is long.
624 is long.

292 is in fact wide.

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b109/scott4020/2012-03-15_16-43-20_163.jpg

iVanDuzer

16-06-2012, 01:23

You're referring to a single data point. That data point also included two of the best robots this year, and a purposefully short robot to make it easier to triple.

We all know two longs can triple, but we can all agree that the more wide robots on the alliance, the easier it *should* be to triple (with all other factors the same).

That being said, at least one elim alliance will triple with two longs at IRI.

While I admit that the EH Team was exceptional, I still agree with your prediction that at least one alliance will have a two longs triple. I was responding to the flurry of posts that seemed to discount teams such as 1114 and 2056 as valuable first round picks because of their orientation. Maybe I chose too good of an example; that alliance made balancing look a lot easier than it actually is.

I do agree that having more wide bots should make it easier to triple. But with the added weight allowance of IRI and the couple months of iteration, I would be very surprised if any alliance in elims has fewer than 2 balancing mechs. I think the number of these stingers or arms or whatever will drastically decrease the difference between long and wide bots (especially if the long bots can hang).

Cory

16-06-2012, 02:53

Thanks for the video this really clears up what happened. It doesn't seemed to have been planned, but a strange situation nonetheless.

Not sure how you come to that conclusion. It looks quite intentional to me.

Jay O'Donnell

16-06-2012, 09:29

Not sure how you come to that conclusion. It looks quite intentional to me.

It doesn't make any sense to me that the two alliances would plan a triple balance on the co-op bridge, because there's no point to it. It looks like 610 died for a short time period of the video, and 1241 went to help. Just my $0.02

Dave Scheck

16-06-2012, 10:05

It doesn't make any sense to me that the two alliances would plan a triple balance on the co-op bridge, because there's no point to it. It looks like 610 died for a short time period of the video, and 1241 went to help. Just my $0.02It was definitely planned between 610, 1241, and the blue team with the unreadable bumpers. You can't really see it in the video, but there's a stinger at each end of the bridge. They were trying to show off what they could do, as was very apparent by the reaction of the guys on the sidelines. After the match we were told that we weren't brought into the loop because we might say no. Needless to say, that match really hurt us when we needed the bridge points the most.

Jay O'Donnell

16-06-2012, 11:44

It was definitely planned between 610, 1241, and the blue team with the unreadable bumpers. You can't really see it in the video, but there's a stinger at each end of the bridge. They were trying to show off what they could do, as was very apparent by the reaction of the guys on the sidelines. After the match we were told that we weren't brought into the loop because we might say no. Needless to say, that match really hurt us when we needed the bridge points the most.

Ok thank you for the explanation. I understand what they were trying to accomplish but in my opinion it probably wasn't worth the risk. Still an interesting match to watch

CalTran

16-06-2012, 12:08

They were trying to show off what they could do, as was very apparent by the reaction of the guys on the sidelines.

While not on this fields and unaware that this happened until now, I can echo that a triple balance on the co-op bridge is not all that much of a crazy idea. My team, over on Archimedes, in our last qualification match, attempted to orchestrate a triple balance on the co-op. We decided to attempt this because at this point we were much too far down in the standings to be an alliance captain or a first round pick, so we figured that showing we are able to triple balance would be the best way to proceed, as people would be looking for a triple balance partner in their second round picks.

Jay O'Donnell

16-06-2012, 15:31

While not on this fields and unaware that this happened until now, I can echo that a triple balance on the co-op bridge is not all that much of a crazy idea. My team, over on Archimedes, in our last qualification match, attempted to orchestrate a triple balance on the co-op. We decided to attempt this because at this point we were much too far down in the standings to be an alliance captain or a first round pick, so we figured that showing we are able to triple balance would be the best way to proceed, as people would be looking for a triple balance partner in their second round picks.

It does seem to be a viable strategy for trying to get you noticed, so for a team that isn't close enough to the top eight to need the co-op points, it does make sense to risk getting less points in exchange for the possibility of having a better chance of being picked. I was thinking from the perspective of a team who would want the co-op points no matter what, but it does make sense for these teams situations

Akash Rastogi

16-06-2012, 15:50

It does seem to be a viable strategy for trying to get you noticed, so for a team that isn't close enough to the top eight to need the co-op points

It is never right to do something like this without telling your entire alliance. 111 was not told of the plan.

Jay O'Donnell

16-06-2012, 15:56

It is never right to do something like this without telling your entire alliance. 111 was not told of the plan.

I do agree with that, especially because of that it is said somewhere else in this thread that 111was not told because the other teams were afraid they would say no. Its true that in certain situations this strategy could have it's benefits, but if only some teams are on board, then you are completely right.

akoscielski3

16-06-2012, 17:21

Has anyone come up with a Ranking for the Highest to Lowest OPR for the teams at IRI?

Gregor

16-06-2012, 17:50

Has anyone come up with a Ranking for the Highest to Lowest OPR for the teams at IRI?

I do.

OPR

1. 2056

2. 67

3. 341

CCWM

1. 2056

2. 341

3. 469

Gregor

18-06-2012, 21:52

Stolen from http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1174460&postcount=62 and applying to IRI (Thanks Travis Hoffman)

STINGER OUT - Stinger of any kind applied outside of frame perimeter
STINGER IN - Stinger of any kind applied inside frame perimeter
BRAKES - Braking/stay put system - mechanical brakes, pneumatic pad onto bridge surface, etc.
PID BRAKES - Deserves its own category if no other mechanical braking present, as control stops once match ends.
OVERHANG(+) - Can hang at least 12" of robot off the bridge. Use OVERHANG+ if you have additional features to secure the bot that don't fall into any other category - wood blocks, wedges, tilting arm to affect COG :-), etc.

16 ...Swerve..
25 ...Long..Stinger In..Brakes
27 ...Long..
33 ...Wide..Stinger Out
45 ...Wide..
48 ...Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
51 ...Wide..Stinger In
67 ...Wide..Stinger Out
68 ...Wide..
71 ...Swerve..
111 ..Long..Stinger In
118 ..Wide..Stinger In
125 ..Long..
148 ..Wide..Stinger In
192 ..Long..
217 ..Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
233 ..Long..
234 ..Wide..
245 ..Wide..
269 ..wide..
292 ..wide..
330 ..Long..Stinger In
340 ..Long..Stinger In
341 ..Wide..Stinger In..10" Han..PID Brakes
359 ..Long..
379 ..Long..
399 ..Wide..
447 ..Long..
461 ..Long..Overhang
469 ..Square..Stinger Out
503 ..Mecanum..
548 ..Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
573 ..Long..
624 ..long..
744 ..Long..
772 ..Long..Overhang
781 ..Long..
829 ..Wide..Overhang
868 ..Square..
907 ..Wide..Stinger Out..PID Brakes
973 ..Swerve..Stinger Out..Brakes
1023 .Wide..Stinger Out
1024 .Wide..
1114 .Long..Stinger In, PID Brakes, Overhang+
1538 .Long..
1592 .Wide..
1640 .Swerve..
1676 .Long..Stinger In
1714 .Wide..
1718 .Wide..Stinger Out..Brakes
1730 .Wide..
1732 .Wide..
1741 .Mecanum..
1902 .Long..
2054 .Long..Stinger Out
2056 .Long..Stinger Out
2168 .Long..Stinger In
2194 .Wide..
2337 .Long..Stinger In..Overhang..Brakes
2590 .Wide..
2614 .Long..
2826 .Long..Stinger In
2834 .Wide..Stinger Out
2949 .Wide..
3098 .Wide..Stinger Out
3138 .Long..
3193 .Long..Overhang+
3310 .Long..Stinger Out
3322 .Wide..Stinger Out
3357 .Wide..
3940 .Wide..
3947 .Long..
4334 .Wide..

JosephC

18-06-2012, 21:55

330 has a stinger In (might be out)
51 was adding a stinger at IGVC, not sure if it has been completed.

Peyton Yeung

18-06-2012, 21:55

PID BRAKES - Deserves its own category if no other mechanical braking ut

Is that similar to having our jags in brake mode?

Gregor

18-06-2012, 22:00

51 was adding a stinger at IGVC, not sure if it has been completed.

I'll leave 51 out until I can get confirmation

Is that similar to having our jags in brake mode?

No PID breaks are electronic breaks that mean that the bot can hold its place on the bridge when its tilted. jags on brake are mainly to stop coasting.

mikemat

18-06-2012, 22:04

Off the top of my head, some teams with stingers 48(in), 51(?), 111(in), 118(in), 148(in), 330(in), 340(in), 548(in), 1023(out), 1114(in), 2054(out), 2056(out), and 3098(out).
25 has brakes.

AdamHeard

18-06-2012, 22:17

Add stinger out and "brakes" for 973.

akoscielski3

18-06-2012, 22:43

772: Long, Currently No Stinger, No Brakes, Overhang(+) (takes up 22" on bridge)

EDIT: We also have our bridge tipper that fits under the bridge. we usually use this during qualifications or even Eliminations if we have a double Balancing Alliance. It really helps for Co-op Points :)

Chris Hibner

18-06-2012, 22:47

I'll leave 51 out until I can get confirmation

No PID breaks are electronic breaks that mean that the bot can hold its place on the bridge when its tilted. jags on brake are mainly to stop coasting.

The stinger was in before St. Louis, but we had to take it off because we couldn't make weight. It went back on at IGVC. We still need to track down two pieces that are missing in order to make it complete.

Hallry

18-06-2012, 22:48

1676 .Long..

You can add 'Stinger In' to 1676 ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Etm8oQDuy-8

Gregor

18-06-2012, 22:52

The stinger was in before St. Louis, but we had to take it off because we couldn't make weight. It went back on at IGVC. We still need to track down two pieces that are missing in order to make it complete.

Is it inside or outside the frame perimeter?

Ekcrbe

18-06-2012, 23:16

...it wont be as easy as 1114, 2056, and 1114 made it look.

WHOA!!!! 1114 twice on the same alliance? That's not fair. (But they would never triple.)

akoscielski3

18-06-2012, 23:23

WHOA!!!! 1114 twice on the same alliance? That's not fair. (But they would never triple.)

You just challenged them. Good luck with that...

18-06-2012, 23:25

341 has a stinger (in)
25 as of BR^2 also has a stinger (in)

Ekcrbe

18-06-2012, 23:26

You just challenged them. Good luck with that...

Okay, they wouldn't triple with 2056. Maybe with some others. But you also have to take into account the fact that they would routinely be up by more than 20 points before the bridges, so it might not matter.

akoscielski3

18-06-2012, 23:29

Okay, they wouldn't triple with 2056. Maybe with some others. But you also have to take into account the fact that they would routinely be up by more than 20 points before the bridges, so it might not matter.

yea but its IRI, these matches will be like the Archimedes finals! they wont just hope for that...

Duke461

19-06-2012, 00:18

461 Overhang (~16 inches)

-Duke

jwfoss

19-06-2012, 07:22

Correction:
2168 .Long.. Stinger In

Chris Hibner

19-06-2012, 07:41

Is it inside or outside the frame perimeter?

Inside. Just barely.

JohnSchneider

19-06-2012, 10:13

3310 stinger 'out' though it does touch our bumper in the front ;o

IndySam

19-06-2012, 11:13

829 short 12" overhang and I just found a 24" cylinder while moving our shop :)

Travis Hoffman

19-06-2012, 11:30

2826 is STINGER IN, unless they've modified their bot since I last saw them.

3193 is OVERHANG+.

1023 is STINGER OUT, from the MARC thread.

548 is STINGER IN..OVERHANG, from the MARC thread.

M. Mellott

19-06-2012, 12:42

3193 is OVERHANG+.

Beat me to it--thanks Trav!

Jared Russell

19-06-2012, 13:12

341 is wide, has an inside-the-frame-perimeter stinger, can hang up to 10" off the edge (requiring a total of 18" of real estate on the bridge when we go up in the rear - not including bumpers, which are low on our leading edge to get under any high bumpers in front of us), and has software brakes.

IKE

19-06-2012, 13:17

I predict at least 1 team unbalancing a bridge while attempting to show off their brand new stinger... So far I have seen at least 1 team unbalance a bridge in order to show their stinger at each event I have attended.

MNellist

20-06-2012, 09:31

340 is STINGER OUT with OVERHANG+

Gregor

20-06-2012, 13:26

Stolen from http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...0&postcount=62 and applying to IRI (Thanks Travis Hoffman)

STINGER OUT - Stinger of any kind applied outside of frame perimeter
STINGER IN - Stinger of any kind applied inside frame perimeter
BRAKES - Braking/stay put system - mechanical brakes, pneumatic pad onto bridge surface, etc.
PID BRAKES - Deserves its own category if no other mechanical braking present, as control stops once match ends.
OVERHANG(+) - Can hang at least 12" of robot off the bridge. Use OVERHANG+ if you have additional features to secure the bot that don't fall into any other category - wood blocks, wedges, tilting arm to affect COG :-), etc.

16 ...Swerve..
25 ...Long..Stinger In..Brakes
27 ...Long..
33 ...Wide..Stinger Out
45 ...Wide..
48 ...Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
51 ...Wide..Stinger In
67 ...Wide..Stinger Out
68 ...Wide..
71 ...Swerve..
111 ..Long..Stinger In
118 ..Wide..Stinger In
125 ..Long..
148 ..Wide..Stinger In
192 ..Long..
217 ..Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
233 ..Long..
234 ..Wide..
245 ..Wide..
269 ..wide..
292 ..wide..
330 ..Long..Stinger In
340 ..Long..Stinger Out..Overhang+
341 ..Wide..Stinger In..10" Hang..PID Brakes
359 ..Long..
379 ..Long..
399 ..Wide..
447 ..Long..
461 ..Long..Overhang
469 ..Square..Stinger Out
503 ..Mecanum..
548 ..Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
573 ..Long..
624 ..long..
744 ..Long..
772 ..Long..Overhang
781 ..Long..
829 ..Wide..Overhang
868 ..Square..
907 ..Wide..Stinger Out..PID Brakes
973 ..Swerve..Stinger Out..Brakes
1023 .Wide..Stinger Out
1024 .Wide..
1114 .Long..Stinger In, PID Brakes, Overhang+
1538 .Long..
1592 .Wide..
1640 .Swerve..
1676 .Long..Stinger In
1714 .Wide..
1718 .Wide..Stinger Out..Brakes
1730 .Wide..
1732 .Wide..
1741 .Mecanum..
1902 .Long..
2054 .Long..Stinger Out
2056 .Long..Stinger Out
2168 .Long..Stinger In
2194 .Wide..
2337 .Long..Stinger In..Overhang..Brakes
2590 .Wide..
2614 .Long..
2826 .Long..Stinger In
2834 .Wide..Stinger Out
2949 .Wide..
3098 .Wide..Stinger Out
3138 .Long..
3193 .Long..Overhang+
3310 .Long..Stinger Out
3322 .Wide..Stinger Out
3357 .Wide..
3940 .Wide..
3947 .Long..
4334 .Wide..

Gregor

22-06-2012, 18:54

We are still missing 37 teams! :ahh: Come on lets keep going :P

Joe Ross

22-06-2012, 19:36

340 is STINGER OUT with OVERHANG+

Did you change your stinger since this video: http://youtu.be/Ar6CMCwlW5k ?

JJackson

24-06-2012, 00:02

781 has a fairly reasonable overhang.... currently we can take up as little as just over 20"..... if we have driven straight onto the bridge. (thanks to our polycord and sliders)
Our low gear pretty much works as a break when the robot is on (you can tip the bridge down and it hardly moves until you shut it off).

MNellist

24-06-2012, 11:04

Did you change your stinger since this video: http://youtu.be/Ar6CMCwlW5k ?

No it has not changed however the stinger is connected to a bracket that is outside the physical frame but inside the bumpers. I guess it all depends on the definition of inside/outside the frame perimeter.

Gregor

24-06-2012, 13:09

No it has not changed however the stinger is connected to a bracket that is outside the physical frame but inside the bumpers. I guess it all depends on the definition of inside/outside the frame perimeter.

Sorry for my ambiguity. Stinger OUT means outside the frame perimeter, the bumpers, and extending beyond the side your drive orientation is (i.e. if you are long orientation it protrudes beyond your short side, if you are wide orientation it protrudes beyond your long side).

lemiant

24-06-2012, 13:28

Sorry for my ambiguity. Stinger OUT means outside the frame perimeter, the bumpers, and extending beyond the side your drive orientation is (i.e. if you are long orientation it protrudes beyond your short side, if you are wide orientation it protrudes beyond your long side).

2056 is an excellent example of an OUT stinger

pwnageNick

24-06-2012, 13:51

2949 .Wide..
also STINGER OUT. this was added before World for us.
also I believe it can hang off 12+ in so OVERHANG(+). I suppose the device we have that makes that possible is our drop down middle wheel. That way the robot just rests on the middle and back wheels. Does that count?

-Nick

Gregor

24-06-2012, 14:06

STINGER OUT - Stinger of any kind applied outside of frame perimeter (i.e. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yEcfc-twnM&feature=player_detailpage#t=268s)
STINGER IN - Stinger of any kind applied inside frame perimeter (i.e. http://youtu.be/Ar6CMCwlW5k)
BRAKES - Braking/stay put system - mechanical brakes, pneumatic pad onto bridge surface, etc.
PID BRAKES - Deserves its own category if no other mechanical braking present, as control stops once match ends.
OVERHANG(+) - Can hang at least 12" of robot off the bridge. Use OVERHANG+ if you have additional features to secure the bot that don't fall into any other category - wood blocks, wedges, tilting arm to affect COG :-), etc.

16 ...Swerve..
25 ...Long..Stinger In..Brakes
27 ...Long..
33 ...Wide..Stinger Out
45 ...Wide..
48 ...Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
51 ...Wide..Stinger In
67 ...Wide..Stinger Out
68 ...Wide..
71 ...Swerve..
111 ..Long..Stinger In..Brakes..Overhang+
118 ..Wide..Stinger In
125 ..Long..
148 ..Wide..Stinger In
192 ..Long..
217 ..Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
233 ..Long..
234 ..Wide..
245 ..Wide..
269 ..wide..
292 ..wide..
330 ..Long..Stinger In
340 ..Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
341 ..Wide..Stinger In..10" Hang..PID Brakes
359 ..Long..
379 ..Long..
399 ..Wide..
447 ..Long..
461 ..Long..Overhang
469 ..Square..Stinger Out
503 ..Mecanum..
548 ..Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
573 ..Long..
624 ..long..
744 ..Long..
772 ..Long..Overhang
781 ..Long..
829 ..Wide..Overhang
868 ..Square..
907 ..Wide..Stinger Out..PID Brakes
973 ..Swerve..Stinger Out..Brakes
1023 .Wide..Stinger Out
1024 .Wide..
1114 .Long..Stinger In, PID Brakes, Overhang+
1538 .Long..
1592 .Wide..
1640 .Swerve..
1676 .Long..Stinger In
1714 .Wide..
1718 .Wide..Stinger Out..Brakes
1730 .Wide..
1732 .Wide..
1741 .Mecanum..
1902 .Long..
2054 .Long..Stinger Out
2056 .Long..Stinger Out
2168 .Long..Stinger In
2194 .Wide..
2337 .Long..Stinger In..Overhang..Brakes
2590 .Wide..
2614 .Long..
2826 .Long..Stinger In
2834 .Wide..Stinger Out
2949 .Wide..Stinger Out..Overhang
3098 .Wide..Stinger Out
3138 .Long..
3193 .Long..Overhang+
3310 .Long..Stinger Out
3322 .Wide..Stinger Out
3357 .Wide..
3940 .Wide..
3947 .Long..
4334 .Wide..

AlecMataloni

24-06-2012, 14:32

Mechanical brakes, Stinger in, Overhang+ (robot grabber).

Justin Montois

24-06-2012, 20:53

340 is Stinger IN

$wimmer3138

25-06-2012, 10:20

3138 stinger in. Overhang of 13in + bumper :)

JohnSchneider

25-06-2012, 10:24

We're overhang+ as well, sorry, the system was a tad confusing at first ;)

Jon Jack

25-06-2012, 11:45

1538 is actually only 34" long (~40.5" with bumpers). Since most of our robot's weight is behind the center wheel, we can hang about 18" (including bumpers) off the ramp. We also have a stinger located just behind the front wheel.

Alexa Stott

25-06-2012, 11:55

This has turned from a prediction thread to a scouting thread.

Gregor

25-06-2012, 19:49

STINGER OUT - Stinger of any kind applied outside of frame perimeter (i.e. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yEcfc-twnM&feature=player_detailpage#t=268s)
STINGER IN - Stinger of any kind applied inside frame perimeter (i.e. http://youtu.be/Ar6CMCwlW5k)
BRAKES - Braking/stay put system - mechanical brakes, pneumatic pad onto bridge surface, etc.
PID BRAKES - Deserves its own category if no other mechanical braking present, as control stops once match ends.
OVERHANG(+) - Can hang at least 12" of robot off the bridge. Use OVERHANG+ if you have additional features to secure the bot that don't fall into any other category - wood blocks, wedges, tilting arm to affect COG :-), etc.

16 ...Swerve..
25 ...Long..Stinger In..Brakes
27 ...Long..
33 ...Wide..Stinger Out
45 ...Wide..
48 ...Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
51 ...Wide..Stinger In
67 ...Wide..Stinger Out
68 ...Wide..
71 ...Swerve..
111 ..Long..Stinger In..Brakes..Overhang+
118 ..Wide..Stinger In
125 ..Long..
148 ..Wide..Stinger In
192 ..Long..
217 ..Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
233 ..Long..
234 ..Wide..
245 ..Wide..
269 ..wide..
292 ..wide..
330 ..Long..Stinger In
340 ..Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
341 ..Wide..Stinger In..10" Hang..PID Brakes
359 ..Long..
379 ..Long..
399 ..Wide..
447 ..Long..
461 ..Long..Overhang
469 ..Square..Stinger Out
503 ..Mecanum..
548 ..Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
573 ..Long..
624 ..long..
744 ..Long..
772 ..Long..Overhang
781 ..Long..
829 ..Wide..Overhang
868 ..Square..
907 ..Wide..Stinger Out..PID Brakes
973 ..Swerve..Stinger Out..Brakes
1023 .Wide..Stinger Out
1024 .Wide..
1114 .Long..Stinger In, PID Brakes, Overhang+
1538 .Long..Stinger In..Overhang
1592 .Wide..
1640 .Swerve..
1676 .Long..Stinger In
1714 .Wide..
1718 .Wide..Stinger Out..Brakes
1730 .Wide..
1732 .Wide..
1741 .Mecanum..
1902 .Long..
2054 .Long..Stinger Out
2056 .Long..Stinger Out
2168 .Long..Stinger In
2194 .Wide..
2337 .Long..Stinger In..Overhang..Brakes
2590 .Wide..
2614 .Long..
2826 .Long..Stinger In..Overhang+..Brakes
2834 .Wide..Stinger Out
2949 .Wide..Stinger Out..Overhang
3098 .Wide..Stinger Out
3138 .Long..Stinger In..Overhang
3193 .Long..Overhang+
3310 .Long..Stinger Out..Overhang+
3322 .Wide..Stinger Out
3357 .Wide..
3940 .Wide..
3947 .Long..
4334 .Wide..

trilogy2826

25-06-2012, 20:25

2826:
Stinger in
Long bot-37" (no bumpers)
20" overhang from frame perimeter
Angled brakes push CG toward bridge center
Passive partner "grabber"

LeelandS

25-06-2012, 21:47

This has turned from a prediction thread to a scouting thread.

In order to predict, don't we need to know about who we're predicting?

Short answer: Yes.

Long answer: Yeeeeeeeeeeeeessssssssssss. ;)

Alexa Stott

26-06-2012, 01:03

In order to predict, don't we need to know about who we're predicting?

Short answer: Yes.

Long answer: Yeeeeeeeeeeeeessssssssssss. ;)

Yet most people who posted in the first half of the thread had no problem making their predictions before this separate discussion was brought up.

Travis Hoffman

26-06-2012, 02:42

I predict that at least 6 out of the top 8 alliance captains will be non-Longs, and the number 1 alliance, comprised of 4 non-Longs, will win IRI. Discuss.

LeelandS

26-06-2012, 09:02

Yet most people who posted in the first half of the thread had no problem making their predictions before this separate discussion was brought up.

I wouldn't argue with free scouting data ;) Granted it probably should be in another thread.

Bjenks548

26-06-2012, 09:11

I predict that at least 6 out of the top 8 alliance captains will be non-Longs, and the number 1 alliance, comprised of 4 non-Longs, will win IRI. Discuss.

I disagree with the winning alliance having 4 non-Longs. With the 1st, 9th, and last pick, they will take a gamble with either the 9th or last pick. They will take the long bot that fell through the cracks for being long, while still having 3 wide robots if the long is unable to triple.

A different prediction from me, triple balances will be rare early in Quals. As teams gain experience throughout the days, there will be more, by eliminations the last robot will go to the bridge ~15 seconds for the triple.

Clinton Bolinger

26-06-2012, 10:46

I predict that at least 6 out of the top 8 alliance captains will be non-Longs, and the number 1 alliance, comprised of 4 non-Longs, will win IRI. Discuss.

You mean MARC all over again?

(Except MARC had 3 Long Bots in the Top 8)

I think 469 will take #1 at IRI. Best intake this season.

-Clinton-

Elizabeth Waters

26-06-2012, 10:55

624 can overhang about a third of our bot (long bot at max length ~38", therefore a little over a foot can overhang, excluding bumpers).

Tyler Olds

26-06-2012, 14:08

I predict that at least 6 out of the top 8 alliance captains will be non-Longs, and the number 1 alliance, comprised of 4 non-Longs, will win IRI. Discuss.

Way to have faith in your own robot :rolleyes: ...........

I actually disagree that longs will not have a chance as the top seeds and it will be more even for the top 8 then 2/8. I believe that many teams who have never worked together will spend too much time trying to triple in qualifications and will miss out on valuable points and/or fail at their attempt.

While I would like to see as many triples as possible in qualifications (including seeing my own team do it), I do not think that we will see a triple all that often where teams were able to start and balance in the last 30 seconds in qualifications (to where I would categorize the 20 points being worthwhile). Though I wonder how busy the practice field will be this year........

Travis Hoffman

26-06-2012, 14:22

Way to have faith in your own robot :rolleyes: ...........

Maybe we're one of the two. Also...reverse psychology. Shhh...:cool:

I actually disagree that longs will not have a chance as the top seeds and it will be more even for the top 8 then 2/8. I believe that many teams who have never worked together will spend too much time trying to triple in qualifications and will miss out on valuable points and/or fail.

And then the longs of IRI unite.

JosephC

26-06-2012, 23:36

I think 469 will take #1 at IRI. Best intake this season.

This is a definite possibility, their performance at MARC was astounding. If only they could stop breaking things :rolleyes:

JohnSchneider

27-06-2012, 01:40

Is gambling legal in Indiana? Because if it is, Id wanna put some money on 341. They were extremely consistent all season, and even though they lost in their division, they also helped put up the season-high high-score. Add to that their amazing tipple balance record and adaptability, and you have some good odds.

waialua359

27-06-2012, 03:26

Way to have faith in your own robot :rolleyes: ...........

I actually disagree that longs will not have a chance as the top seeds and it will be more even for the top 8 then 2/8. I believe that many teams who have never worked together will spend too much time trying to triple in qualifications and will miss out on valuable points and/or fail at their attempt.

While I would like to see as many triples as possible in qualifications (including seeing my own team do it), I do not think that we will see a triple all that often where teams were able to start and balance in the last 30 seconds in qualifications (to where I would categorize the 20 points being worthwhile). Though I wonder how busy the practice field will be this year........
This was about the only concern I had about the rule changes.
They'll need about 2-3 more bridges on the practice field.:)

Travis Hoffman

27-06-2012, 04:13

This was about the only concern I had about the rule changes.
They'll need about 2-3 more bridges on the practice field.:)

Thus ensuring a very congested space filled with moving machinery, increasing the risk of injury - you know how many people are involved in handling cables and "spotting" robots once they're on the bridge. I just foresee nonstop chaos and unequal access at the practice area. If a formal schedule isn't meticulously kept by a bevy of volunteers, and the traffic on the field isn't managed by another bevy, some teams are going to be shut out of the triple practice process (much like they were in St. Louis), and safety will become a huge concern.

Unless the staff establishes a very structured method of controlling practice field access (the six teams in Match #X are scheduled to practice on the field 15 minutes before they are requested to queue, for example), I think they should disallow all triple practice and let teams have at it with nothing but prior event experience to draw from.

Isn't part of the "mystique" of qualifying triples supposed to be the "newness" of it all? Tripling in qualifying is the anti-elimination experience - you're not supposed to have any prior practice - just have at it.

Plus, presuming a team will want to triple attempt with partners more often than not (not necessarily the case for all teams), the thought of spending every possible minute outside of your qualifying matches either on the practice field or waiting to get on it seems....not fun.

whattsheorder

27-06-2012, 14:10

An alliance with 2056, 1114, and some sort of good balancing robot would be outstanding. They had their triple balance down at worlds and would have done it on Einstein if it hadn't have been for the field issues.

Racer26

27-06-2012, 17:36

Something tells me that the Eh team won't be allowed to reunite to take IRI if the other 7 alliances have something to say about it.

akoscielski3

28-06-2012, 00:03

Something tells me that the Eh team won't be allowed to reunite to take IRI if the other 7 alliances have something to say about it.

Its unfortunate, but i think you are correct. 4334 will be picked pretty quickly in the second round. maybe i'm wrong but i dont think soo...

Bjenks548

29-06-2012, 11:25

I'm curious who people think are the best feeding robots at IRI. Some honnorable mentions from me would be...
16
245
330
2194

Who else has an impressive feeding record?

CalTran

29-06-2012, 11:28

I'm curious who people think are the best feeding robots at IRI. Some honnorable mentions from me would be...
16
245
330
2194

Who else has an impressive feeding record?

I think that 4334 should also be on this list, as they are designed for the soul purpose of feeding Canadian Powerhouses.

Travis Hoffman

29-06-2012, 12:01

I think that 4334 should also be on this list, as they are designed for the soul purpose of feeding Canadian Powerhouses.

Or anyone else who picks them before they do.

269

AlexD744

29-06-2012, 13:12

As far as feeder bots go, we worked with 1714 on Galileo, and although they are great at scoring, and that was their main function on our alliance, I can also picture them doing an amazing job feeding because of their double sided pick up and smart drivers and coach.

akoscielski3

29-06-2012, 13:52

I'm curious who people think are the best feeding robots at IRI. Some honnorable mentions from me would be...
16
245
330
2194

Who else has an impressive feeding record?

I hate talking about my own team, because i dont wanna feel like im branging but...

We were paired with 1730, and 3138 at queen city for one on the matches. All we did was feed the whole match because it was 3 great offensive teams together. we stole so many balls from the opposing alliance they were struggling to find any. When they went to grab one, we would come from the side and steal the ball right from them. we fed 1730 and 3138 so great that we won that match 75-55. Here is a video of that match. (http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/21640656)

Really my point is that almost any offensive robot can feed. Some obviously better than others.

R.C.

29-06-2012, 13:59

16/330/4334 are probably the best feeder bots at IRI. 973 could fall into this category if they chose to @ IRI.

-RC

Tyler Olds

29-06-2012, 15:35

16/330/4334 are probably the best feeder bots at IRI. 973 could fall into this category if they chose to @ IRI.

-RC
I agree that 16 was an amazing feeder at champs, but I really hope they are able to get there shooter working at a high capacity so they can show off what their robot is really capable of at IRI.

AdamHeard

29-06-2012, 16:01

16/330/4334 are probably the best feeder bots at IRI. 973 could fall into this category if they chose to @ IRI.

-RC

I think any devent scorer can be a great feeder, they are just rarely asked to play that role.

R.C.

29-06-2012, 16:19

I think any devent scorer can be a great feeder, they are just rarely asked to play that role.

Defiantly true,

Most of the top level teams can, at IRI it'll be interesting to see how each alliance handles who to send over.

-RC

Meredith Novak

29-06-2012, 16:41

I agree that 16 was an amazing feeder at champs, but I really hope they are able to get there shooter working at a high capacity so they can show off what their robot is really capable of at IRI.

That is obviously the plan - issues with the catapult should be resolved.

Brandon Holley

29-06-2012, 16:50

I'm late to the party on this one, but I felt the need to update our team info:

16 ...Swerve..
25 ...Long..Stinger In..Brakes
27 ...Long..
33 ...Wide..Stinger Out
45 ...Wide..
48 ...Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
51 ...Wide..Stinger In
67 ...Wide..Stinger Out
68 ...Wide..
71 ...Swerve..
111 ..Long..Stinger In..Brakes..Overhang+
118 ..Wide..Stinger In
125 ..Long..Stinger Out..Overhang+
148 ..Wide..Stinger In
192 ..Long..
217 ..Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
233 ..Long..
234 ..Wide..
245 ..Wide..
269 ..wide..
292 ..wide..
330 ..Long..Stinger In
340 ..Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
341 ..Wide..Stinger In..10" Hang..PID Brakes
359 ..Long..
379 ..Long..
399 ..Wide..
447 ..Long..
461 ..Long..Overhang
469 ..Square..Stinger Out
503 ..Mecanum..
548 ..Long..Stinger In..Overhang+
573 ..Long..
624 ..long..
744 ..Long..
772 ..Long..Overhang
781 ..Long..
829 ..Wide..Overhang
868 ..Square..
907 ..Wide..Stinger Out..PID Brakes
973 ..Swerve..Stinger Out..Brakes
1023 .Wide..Stinger Out
1024 .Wide..
1114 .Long..Stinger In, PID Brakes, Overhang+
1538 .Long..Stinger In..Overhang
1592 .Wide..
1640 .Swerve..
1676 .Long..Stinger In
1714 .Wide..
1718 .Wide..Stinger Out..Brakes
1730 .Wide..
1732 .Wide..
1741 .Mecanum..
1902 .Long..
2054 .Long..Stinger Out
2056 .Long..Stinger Out
2168 .Long..Stinger In
2194 .Wide..
2337 .Long..Stinger In..Overhang..Brakes
2590 .Wide..
2614 .Long..
2826 .Long..Stinger In..Overhang+..Brakes
2834 .Wide..Stinger Out
2949 .Wide..Stinger Out..Overhang
3098 .Wide..Stinger Out
3138 .Long..Stinger In..Overhang
3193 .Long..Overhang+
3310 .Long..Stinger Out..Overhang+
3322 .Wide..Stinger Out
3357 .Wide..
3940 .Wide..
3947 .Long..
4334 .Wide..

-Brando

Gdeaver

29-06-2012, 17:17

Any swerve drive can apply the equivalent of brakes by turning their wheels 90 degrees. That's what we do.

Starke

30-06-2012, 01:14

Just a heads up: Check out a picture of every robot attending the 2012 IRI on FRC Designs! You can view every robot and download the entire album!

http://www.frc-designs.com/Photos2012.html

Matt

XaulZan11

30-06-2012, 08:33

If you don't have 1714 on your list of best feeder bots, you'll be in for a surprise*. Although they were forced to score for their elmination alliance, I do not think they were that far behind 16 in feeding on Galileo.

*provided they use their same driveteam.

Gregor

30-06-2012, 11:58

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1175109&postcount=184
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1175868&postcount=219

Moved to this thread

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1175928#post1175928

Jared Russell

02-07-2012, 09:22

Here's a thought...

Getting into IRI is largely (but not entirely) due to on-field results. Since triple balancing is a significant factor in this game, it stands to reason that robots that have triple balanced reliably in competition had an advantage when it came to getting invited.

However, no OPR stats reflect the ability to triple balance (since there is no 40 point bonus in qualification rounds, and in elims there is no such thing as OPR).

In light of this, I tested the hypothesis that, on average, the long robots invited to IRI have a higher OPR than the non-longs. (I used the invitation list since I'm not clear whether the "final" acceptance list has been posted)

What I found (based on the post-Championship Ed Law scouting database; all OPR numbers are adjusted for the co-op bridge):

Best event OPR:
Average for longs: 28.5
Average for non-longs: 26.7

Latest event OPR:
Average for longs: 25.7
Average for non-longs: 24.0

"World rank" weighted average OPR:
Average for longs: 23.4
Average for non-longs: 21.3

Hypothesis confirmed. On average, long bots at IRI are 1.7 - 2.2 OPR points better than wides. An alliance with 3 longs has a projected total score anywhere from 5.2 to 6.5 points higher than an alliance with 3 non-longs (depending on your preferred metric).

Between the on-paper advantage of ~2 more balls in the high goal per match for an all-long alliance, and the fact that triple balancing necessarily means that everyone must stop shooting early and carries no guarantee of success, maybe things aren't so bad for longs after all :)

akoscielski3

03-07-2012, 21:32

I wasn't sure where else to post this without opening another thread for no reason so here it is.

Team 772 will be traveling from Windsor Ontario (just across the border from Detroit). We will only be having 4 students at the competition. We have The two drivers, a programmer, and another member from the business side of the team. the programmer and business member will be switching as Human player, and my brother will be the Drive coach. SO... what I am pretty much asking is if people would be able to help us out if we needed something in an emergency? We are also wondering if we could use someone else's scouting data for the competition during alliance selections? I know scouting is a lot to ask but we don't have the people to do it at this competition.

AND most importantly! We will need some help with our cheer while getting announced! Our cheer is very well known in Canada and is slowly getting known throughout the states. When our team number gets announced we aren't called 772, The MC will say "SEVEN SEVEN WHO!??!?!" and our team (and others in the stands) will respond "SEVEN SEVEN TWO!!!!!". Its a pretty fun cheer and I'm hoping everyone will help us out :D

Thanks FIRST Family :D

Carolyn_Grace

06-07-2012, 12:53

Thus ensuring a very congested space filled with moving machinery, increasing the risk of injury - you know how many people are involved in handling cables and "spotting" robots once they're on the bridge. I just foresee nonstop chaos and unequal access at the practice area. If a formal schedule isn't meticulously kept by a bevy of volunteers, and the traffic on the field isn't managed by another bevy, some teams are going to be shut out of the triple practice process (much like they were in St. Louis), and safety will become a huge concern.

This was one of my huge concerns when finding volunteers for the Michigan State Championship event. At MSC we had five ramps set up, with about two-three volunteers manning the practice field at a time. It was certainly busy, but people were very conscientious of being careful. As long as there are not extra people standing around creating robot campfires, then I actually wouldn't foresee this as an issue. Especially as the IRI planning crew and volunteers are fantastic at what they do. To add: IRI has a much larger area for a practice field than what we had at MSC.

Bjenks548

09-07-2012, 09:36

Some predictions:
In qualifications:
There will be more double triples then single triples.
36 or higher auton scores will happen ~50% of the time.
Robots without a longstanding reputation will have difficulty convincing an alliance not to feed.

Alliance selection:
The top 4 will take the top 4 offensive robots
Bottom 4 then take the top 4 feeder robots
Top 4 then take the 5-8 best feeder robots
bottom 4 take the 5-8 best offensive robots

Eliminations:
Will be very exciting and hard to predict

$wimmer3138

09-07-2012, 10:20

Robots without a longstanding reputation will have difficulty convincing an alliance not to feed.

I feel that this is very true but is not just IRI specific. It will be interesting to see what robots take on what niches with the competion so competitive.

LeelandS

09-07-2012, 10:35

Some predictions:

Alliance selection:
The top 4 will take the top 4 offensive robots
Bottom 4 then take the top 4 feeder robots
Top 4 then take the 5-8 best feeder robots
bottom 4 take the 5-8 best offensive robots

Interesting. Why do you think the bottom 4 seeds will pass over strong offense for a good feeder bot? It seems to me like you'd want to secure your robotic firepower first, then work on getting a robot to feed. You could have all 18 balls fed to your side and it doesn't make a difference if you can't put them in effectively. At least, that's my view.

mikemat

09-07-2012, 10:42

Interesting. Why do you think the bottom 4 seeds will pass over strong offense for a good feeder bot? It seems to me like you'd want to secure your robotic firepower first, then work on getting a robot to feed. You could have all 18 balls fed to your side and it doesn't make a difference if you can't put them in effectively. At least, that's my view.

With the depth of field at IRI, it is very possible that a great feeder bot, a great shooter, and a good shooter would be better than having two great shooters and a good feeder. It all depends on how far the great shooters and feeders (captains/first round) are from the good shooters and feeders (second round).

LeelandS

09-07-2012, 10:49

With the depth of field at IRI, it is very possible that a great feeder bot, a great shooter, and a good shooter would be better than having two great shooters and a good feeder. It all depends on how far the great shooters and feeders (captains/first round) are from the good shooters and feeders (second round).

That's true. If an amazing scorer seeds 5-8, then they may want to go ahead and pick up a strong feeder before rounding out their offense. If a team like 118/2056/1114, etc.. who is a strong scorer can get fed well, they'll probably be very well off with a "good" scorer backing them up.

Still, I'd rather get the best offensive robot available first and then a feeder bot. A strong offensive team will probably not be a stranger to feeding itself, so if given the opportunity, as an alliance captain, I'd rather put together the best offense I can first then a feeder bot, and adjust my strategy depending on where the balls are.